In case you need bass traps (and you probably do) I've added an affiliate link to the video description. (Affiliate link means I get a commission if you make a purchase using that link. You won't pay extra.)
I love when you talk about mixing as a human experience. There are so many people who can throw a bunch of science at you but fail to realize the bigger picture.
Not a bigger picture. Just a different point of view. There are countless of different POVs and the "big picture" would be to understand all the essential positive and negative traits and differences of those. Your particulat POV just happens to align well with Dan's way of expressing him. And I have to admit, it aligns with mine too.
Kind of similar to how you can have a nice walk through a forrest and you see an amazing sight of light cutting through trees, vivid colors, great composition, etc. You grab your phone, take a picture and on your phone it looks nothing like what you are seeing with your eyes.
This is the perfect analogy. I've used a similar one that recording an album versus hearing it live is more like painting a picture than photographing one. You're never going to get full fidelity but it's also an opportunity to add things that weren't there originally.
Parapharsing something you said in this video - "What you perceive is not some sort of objective reality. It is constructed inside your head from the cues and clues your brain gets from objective reality". Very deep Dan... both in the context of a mix but also on a much broader level. I like it immensely. Thanks!!
Great point about notches in rooms. Two exact sinewaves adding up will be +6.02 dB, and can easily be corrected (it's much more complex in a room). But two exact sinewaves cancelling out will reduce by infinity dB, so can't be compensated for without using acoustic treatment to make the notch less "infinite".
the only audio production / mixing channel ive found that takes into account the neurophysiology of audition! For a neuro person this is like speaking in my native language. very helpful
So glad I've found this channel. Fast becoming my favourite for sound advice (in all meanings of the phrase). About a decade ago I completely lost the hearing in one ear. (Luckily I got some of it back after a few months). But while I only had one working ear, I was unable to filter out room acoustics. It's stereo hearing that allows the brain to do its filtering.
Possibly impish question: we've recently moved to the end of the world. Outside of the summer vacation season it is so quiet outside that you can sometimes even hear the engines of the occasional long haul flights. Our closest nrighbour is 250 meters away up on the hill. So rather than mixing in my admittedly large home studio shed, wouldn't it make more sense for me to just set it up as a more lively recording space, and for mixing just set up my computer and monitors outside on the Terrasse, the balcony or even somewhere on our grounds or woods and mix there? Asking because I love the sound of the new space, so I'm considering canceling my plans for treating the acoustics. Even empty there's no bominess or flutter. Just "ambience"
Mixing under the stars sounds pretty awesome, you should try it just because! Acoustically I'm not sure: open air is the same as perfect absorption, and generally people don't build totally dead mixing rooms. But if you're on a balcony, that implies at least one wall somewhere... try it, see if you get good results.
Dan you are a legend. Every video is packed full of information and nuance, filtered by your experience, communicated clearly and effectively. I don't think I've ever learned more from one person.
I could listen to you for hours! So much info that is actually really useful. And you give completely new points of view to stuff we think we already know :-)
..."So I decided to make it a video script instead". In hear lies everything missing from the competition. The endless unscripted waffle from your peers... They can talk all they want but you just run in circles around them, fireing facts faster than they can say eq-cut. Keep up the tremendous work Dan.
Two thoughts: 1. It’s just like taking a picture. At the time you notice the subject, and maybe some background “props”. But when you see it developed you start to see tons of details ! 2. I recently sent a song to about 20 mix engineers and producers. I asked “how does this bass guitar seem to you?” I literally got 20 different answers. Some people said the bass was muddy and too loud, other said it was way deficient, other said it was twangy, and my best was the guy who said it sounded like “sh-beeep-t” !! After watching your presentation here, I now realize that everybody’s room or listening source is different, hence the difference in replies.
Dan, between this video and the previous, I would like to just say thank you! This is some stuff that has particular relevance for me (and many others) I'm sure right now. Once again, thank you.
Thanks Dan. Really clear tutorial. Love the bits about how the brain translates the waveforms. Its really amazing. We are immersed in such natural creativity and intelligence - and so unaware of it!
wow this video is awesome Dan, the concept of our brain correcting room reflections in real time really blew my mind and answered a lot of questions, thanks we really need more of these types of videos
I actually never thought about why don’t we put just one microphone in any room and just record everything “as we hear it”. It’s crazy what our brain does. Very good “podcast” =). Getting used to something is really key. And most people don’t do it. They just build a homestudio and listen to music elsewhere. Even with headphones. Anyway. You said it all. Always a pleasure learning from you. Thanks.
Thumbs up! The adaptation during a dialogue mix kicks in so fast that I have to pause after two or three loops, maybe play with more preroll to get a good reference again. It's quite scary sometimes even after over 20 years of dialogue mixing experience. Good rooms to record in are such a treasure, even when you have to make one with rolling absorbers. I'll often use closed headphones when phasing the mic around with my field recorder, studio voice or instrument. Only way for me to judge it well enough if I'm alone.
Great points here. Understanding the physical cues the brain uses to make sense of the environment, and how these translate to our real-life 3D perception vs listening to a recording playback from monitors, is one of the best insights to have as an engineer. This, alongside the nature of how the brain adapts to the sounds, in relation to ear fatigue and perceptual distortion. A profound explanation indeed! Thanks Dan
I use Dirac room correction. AND created a curve that, after adjusting several times, got me to a sound more or less as expected in different systems. Def not a flat curve. Just one that translates. The magic of it is that I can move to whatever studio and apply the same curve after remeasuring and the results are going to be very consistent to my own studio.
A key ingredient in making mixes translate in my opinion - that might be obvious - is the song itself...Songwriting, composition, use of 'space', use of complementary octaves, etc. I find that a really meticulously composed or well thought out song can easily translate on the worst speakers, rooms, listening environments. But sometimes a really special song can sound so interesting too... So for me often the question becomes: how far can I push this to translate before I am ruining the unique characteristics of the song itself and I am hurting the song rather than helping it.
I've been trying to record and mix my own music (drums, bass, guitars, organ, vocals, hand percussion etc...basic rock) for some years. I've always been very bad at it. I THINK I finally worked out what the problem is. Just like you said...you need a very well thought out song...good solid arrangement and recorded to the best of your ability. I spent years with the mindset that "if I managed to play it and record it"...it was good. It's not. You need the best possible arrangement and the best possible tracks you can achieve. Only then will you have a hint of a hope of mixing something decent.
I know all this stuff but it's so nice to hear someone else expounding it. Besides, your delivery is great and you're succinct with it. When I have to preach to the neophytes I'm nowhere near as polite.
Perfect room is 'asymptote' (the idea that Dan explained about reducing gains...it a point that is never achieved) A great mix is analog to a great photo...it highlights the power of bokeh or focus and blur. Good mixes can use any of those 'bad' cues ie rooms etc; ie the become the painting 'value key' The power of the art of mixing is parallel to using dynamic space (HDR), focus using landscape cues (transient/eq). RE Translation: To fix most of the low frequency issues for bedroom producers, sure use room/trapping etc BUT tactile feedback (especially at low volumes) is the most trusting tool. On top of Dans great advice here is a reasonably simple thing I hinge bottom end checking on; 1. A good referencing plugin built into your workflow so that its a 1 button press to AB AND 2. Install a tactile transducer into your listening chair with a reasonable cutoff (I use 100hz) and use the AB reference button A LOT at first. After a while you will use it a lot less but comparative kinetics will struggle to lie ie the transient and vibration
This was good to re listen too. Just trying to rethink my room a little. It occurred to me that all I have on my massive desk is a keyboard and a mouse. Maybe I don’t need a huge desk at all! But alas, it’s good to remember not to get too bogged down in these things - do what you can with what you have got, then get back to work!🎉
If you want great bass absorbtion you should add purple and yellow crystals on top of your corner traps. Also: bass tube traps DIY style fix a room if you put in enough of them
When you are that smart that even with a waveform you realize that changing the colours might catch more visual attention... And as always, amazing information and perfectly explained. Thank you!
Not just the things we are used to hear are somehow constructed. There is also the theorie from Peter Berger & Thomas Luckmann (two incredible sociologists) which is about the idea, that what we call objective society is socially constructed. If you have time and space for a good book its called ‚The social construction of reality‘.
I've treated my room with a bunch of stuff laying around. Thats why my parents loses all their arguments when it comes to clean up my room. I really do need the 12 empty pizza boxes for the accoustics. And that is not a pile of laundry on my bed. It's a bass trap. The dishes are perfect for diffusion.
TBH this raises more questions for me then it answers - how fast does this brain correction takes place? - does it really correct for spectrum curve, not just the echo and resonances you talked about in the beginning? - why are so many people still so happy about room correction software like Sonarworks? shouldn't your brain already adjust for these minor imperfections?
- I don't really know, but my intuition is that most of it happens very quickly (almost instantly) but some of it is much slower and more gradual. - The spectrum curve is a result of reflections. It's a mistake to think of this as separate to the 'reverb': it's all reflections ultimately. - to the extent that EQ room correction works, it's just the same as upgrading the monitors or adding acoustic treatment: your brain has to work less to decode what it's actually hearing, mixing becomes easier (and more enjoyable).
I'd just like to add that with room acoustics it's not only about frequency response of the room but also about reverberation in different frequency ranges. When considering any room correction system one have to think about the fact that it will only correct frequency response and not issues with reverberation.
I mix in an LA apartment bedroom and haven’t been able to completely treat it. But I’ve listened to a ton of reference material and just learned to compensate for its shortcomings. Example; my monitors have various correction dip-switches for placement scenarios so I tuned it so that my reference material was just on the *verge* of feeling boomy in really bass heavy music. But not actually boomy yet. This way I know, if my low end gets boomy I have a problem, but I’m not masking potential problems either. My wife’s car stereo is brutal for low end/low mids getting muddy, but I found a good balance in my room without spending a fortune where my mixes sound balanced on different playback systems. I still reference every mix on multiple playback systems before sending though, including Apple earbuds haha
6:45 -- In theory, if you have a zero (notch) in the frequency response, you can fix it by putting a pole (undamped resonance) in its position and recover the original signal. No information is lost. Linear systems don't destroy information. The problem here is when wide enough frequency intervals get attenuated too much. Then when you boost those intervals to recover the signal, you boost noise as well. And often enough parts of the frequency response are well below the noise floor, so you're just amplifying noise there. What would happen in reality if you tried to fix a notch-filtered signal "perfectly", is that the noise would keep feeding the resonant filter and you'd end up with a nasty ever-intensifying tone where the notch used to be. With no noise whatsoever you wouldn't have a problem, but zero noise is an impossibility in reality.
I had isolated nearfield monitors (original NS10Ms and Dynaudio BM15s) in a treated environment and they were fine, but I got rid of all of that and now mix in just Neumann NDH-30 headphones. Couldn't be happier with it. Actually maybe I could be with Audeze LCD-5s.
Some of the pre-eminent mixing engineers are removing the room from the equation by mixing primarily on headphones and then checking their mixes on various monitors.
I kinda tripped into "semi professional" territory. The "studio" was an open kitchen, which had been treated better than our current room. I've been elected the new engineer, so I'm still trying to figure everything out. When we recorded some bass, we put the amp into the bedroom next door and built a cave around the cab from anything soft. A small couch, cushions, heavy blankets ... it looked super scetchy, but contained the sound beautifully. Can you recommend some learning material about acoustic and bass traps in particular? Our new room is as wide as it's tall, which isn't ideal and our room treatment isn't great.
This also explains to me my lifelong (futile) struggle to get "the" sound in the room of my guitar on tape. Äh, disc. No use in trying, just get a good version on how a great rock guitar sounds on record. The latter always felt like a defeat. But it isn't, right? Thx for this video podcast, Dan.
1:02 never a truer word spoken! I have been chasing a flat response for about 18 months, and you get closer and closer and spend more, and more and you never actually get there. You pull back more and more layers of an onion that has more and more issues hiding beneath each layer. Yeah, you see an improvement with every panel and Bass trap but you also see the next issue. What was once a random 12db null in the frequency response (same as all the other 12-15db nulls) is now a *big* 12db null that didn’t go away as everything else flattened out….so, more panels and bass traps…and so it goes on.
Also, treating a room properly is very very expensive. Just FYI. 1” Foam is garbage. Minimum 4” panels if you want any chance of treating Bass below 250hz. 6” if you want to treat Bass below 100hz
I always thought that one of the reasons a sound source sounds different directly hearing it in the room it is in, and hearing it after it's been recorded, was mostly due to the microphone you record it with, and the monitoring system you use to listen to it. Our ears are pretty much microphones, right? And they have their own frequency response, like a microphone. But a microphone's frequency response is going to be very different from your ear's response (and from other microphones' responses). I've always though of having microphones as just having different-sounding ears at your disposal. So, the sound captured by a microphone is always different from the sound captured by your ears (not to mention we always hear with two ears, but we don't always mic things with 2 microphones). Then comes your monitoring system, being a set of speakers or headphones, which are very similar to microphones. They also have their own frequency response, which shapes the frequency content of what you just recorded even further (not to mention the new room you're in, which is also part of your monitoring system, and which I though also contributed to this greatly, and all the cables and equipment the signal goes through as well). So it made perfect sense to me that I would hear things in the recording that I wasn't hearing when I was in the room, because the microphes, the speakers, and everything inbetween were contributing to this tonal-shaping train of doom, accentuating stuff I couldn't hear before. So I was totally wrong, then? It's mostly our brains' doing? Or is it a mix of everything? Cheers man, love your videos! (sorry if my english is messy, I'm not a native speaker)
Nice video! extra notres : Frequency response of speakers at listening position ca be adjusted-corrected (to a vertain amount) after measurements with sonarwotks. And some emulation of listening system for headphones like Realphone may also worth taking a look.
The only thing I would add to Chad's comment is that you're mix doesn't have to sound perfect in the studio, on the hi-fi, in the car, on ear buds, on your phone... it has to sound comperable to reference mixes of your choice on those systems. Even superb mixes don't sound great firing off an mp3 on your phone BUT if you can get your mix to sound comperable to them then you know you have done the best that you can do.
My answer to that posted comment would have been: Recorded music plays back through a speaker or speakers. Whatever space, environment or room that the speakers are in, and emits sound from…has nothing to do with how the recording was originally mixed or mastered. It’s just you & your perception of sound within that space that will tell you if it’s perfect…to you. Also are you a DJ?
Agree with everyone on how much of a human being you sound in regards to mixing, but dude! What a visualiser! Is this an openGL script or something in after effects? Makes me too curious 😋☺️
I had a big studio with all the fancy stuff you can imagine and now after 40 years I work on a MacBook speaker and headphones and I make much better-sounding music than before I remember one thing very well at the time of the studio I had TAD speakers valued now around 70/100 thousand euro very beautiful speaker to listen to but if you mix on that one the result was something absolutely unbalanced so at the end, all the mix was made on the Yamaha ns10 and the auratone Thank you to clarify concept very difficult to understand
Absolutely a valid option, but you have to get used to the way they sound and consciously aim for a bass light mix. Personally I prefer mixing on full range monitors with a subwoofer, I just find it more enjoyable.
2:37 paused my first viewing to write this so forgive me if I'm missing the point but by that logic could you not reason that when listening to a live band in, say, a small room, one hears not the separate instruments but rather a single, complex pressure gradient, or, one in each ear. This in turn is decoded in one's head. Now resuming video playback... 4:20 I think I've missed the point. I'll leave this up as a reminder to myself to watch the full video before commenting.
My mixes translate so much better since I use Slate VSX headphones. Those emulate different rooms / speakers (car, studios, boombox, club etc). You can listen to your mix in those different rooms / speakers and it gives a pretty good feedback on how the mix sounds there / where mixing problems are. Was always struggling with mix translation. Not anymore. 🙂
Indeed, I tell my peers that music might be subjective but sound is objective. As young guru put it, "At at the end of the day it's two speakers, does it sound good? And also, you need to have enough practice to just do things, like the way you don't actively think about breathing or walking"
So if you´re under budget and/or tenant agreement limits, what´s your advice for this situation: Depending on where you stand, the perceived sound of reference material varies between awesome and awful, partially bass heavy as when you enter the club and start hearing the music. There are sweet spots, that´s where the mixing position is. But it´s next to impossible to break from sitting at the mixing desk, which is something I like to do so I don´t exhaust my hearing or concentration. So would you rather aim for an improved overall sound at a majority of positions in the room or focus on improving acoustics at the workplace?
I'd focus on your mix position first. But, if the sound in your mix position is dramatically different to the rest of the room it might be worth trying a different room configuration. Try facing a different wall, if that's possible...
@@DanWorrall Many thanks for your advice! There aren´t many alternatives to the mix position I´m afraid, but that´s ok - sound is about right in that spot. The differences aren´t that big around the mix position (2-3m), but the larger the distance, the worse it gets (8-9m). Basically it´s two rooms (4x5 and 5x6m) in an L shape with no wall in between. I thought about keeping the mix position as it is and maybe go for a second speaker set in the other area, then switch when breaking from the desk. It has been said before, but I need to repeat others: Thank you for delivering so many great insights, it´s a pearl in the sea of information out there.
In case you need bass traps (and you probably do) I've added an affiliate link to the video description. (Affiliate link means I get a commission if you make a purchase using that link. You won't pay extra.)
I love when you talk about mixing as a human experience. There are so many people who can throw a bunch of science at you but fail to realize the bigger picture.
Not a bigger picture. Just a different point of view. There are countless of different POVs and the "big picture" would be to understand all the essential positive and negative traits and differences of those. Your particulat POV just happens to align well with Dan's way of expressing him. And I have to admit, it aligns with mine too.
that's the difference between experience and wisdom as opposed to superficial knowledge
Yeah!! This
@@anteshell agreed with you AND @Medvi94
it's ALL subjective.
Kind of similar to how you can have a nice walk through a forrest and you see an amazing sight of light cutting through trees, vivid colors, great composition, etc. You grab your phone, take a picture and on your phone it looks nothing like what you are seeing with your eyes.
This is the perfect analogy. I've used a similar one that recording an album versus hearing it live is more like painting a picture than photographing one. You're never going to get full fidelity but it's also an opportunity to add things that weren't there originally.
Parapharsing something you said in this video - "What you perceive is not some sort of objective reality. It is constructed inside your head from the cues and clues your brain gets from objective reality". Very deep Dan... both in the context of a mix but also on a much broader level. I like it immensely. Thanks!!
Great point about notches in rooms. Two exact sinewaves adding up will be +6.02 dB, and can easily be corrected (it's much more complex in a room). But two exact sinewaves cancelling out will reduce by infinity dB, so can't be compensated for without using acoustic treatment to make the notch less "infinite".
the only audio production / mixing channel ive found that takes into account the neurophysiology of audition! For a neuro person this is like speaking in my native language. very helpful
So glad I've found this channel. Fast becoming my favourite for sound advice (in all meanings of the phrase).
About a decade ago I completely lost the hearing in one ear. (Luckily I got some of it back after a few months). But while I only had one working ear, I was unable to filter out room acoustics. It's stereo hearing that allows the brain to do its filtering.
I liked this format and would very much enjoy a Dan Worrall podcast. Maybe someday?
2 videos in 2 days?! that's too good to be true
A+ content here. Thanks Dan. Absolutely mind-blowing
I use quantum acoustic panels, and my room correction is so perfect that I can now HEAR people's thoughts through my studio monitors...
that's just FM radio interference m8
@@BananaManPL I use my tin foil hat to block out radio interference
Just put a bowl of mommy's little helpers by the door.
steady now HAL
I just tape my 10 " monitors to my head and that eliminates room acoustics 100% like headphones really, think outside the box guys
Possibly impish question: we've recently moved to the end of the world. Outside of the summer vacation season it is so quiet outside that you can sometimes even hear the engines of the occasional long haul flights. Our closest nrighbour is 250 meters away up on the hill.
So rather than mixing in my admittedly large home studio shed, wouldn't it make more sense for me to just set it up as a more lively recording space, and for mixing just set up my computer and monitors outside on the Terrasse, the balcony or even somewhere on our grounds or woods and mix there?
Asking because I love the sound of the new space, so I'm considering canceling my plans for treating the acoustics. Even empty there's no bominess or flutter. Just "ambience"
Mixing under the stars sounds pretty awesome, you should try it just because! Acoustically I'm not sure: open air is the same as perfect absorption, and generally people don't build totally dead mixing rooms. But if you're on a balcony, that implies at least one wall somewhere... try it, see if you get good results.
Dan you are a legend. Every video is packed full of information and nuance, filtered by your experience, communicated clearly and effectively. I don't think I've ever learned more from one person.
I could listen to you for hours! So much info that is actually really useful. And you give completely new points of view to stuff we think we already know :-)
..."So I decided to make it a video script instead". In hear lies everything missing from the competition. The endless unscripted waffle from your peers... They can talk all they want but you just run in circles around them, fireing facts faster than they can say eq-cut. Keep up the tremendous work Dan.
I just love your explanations. And of course your style of presenting your material. Keep doing what you are doing, good man
"Well... yes and no." A Dan Worrall Biopic.
Two thoughts:
1. It’s just like taking a picture. At the time you notice the subject, and maybe some background “props”. But when you see it developed you start to see tons of details !
2. I recently sent a song to about 20 mix engineers and producers. I asked “how does this bass guitar seem to you?”
I literally got 20 different answers. Some people said the bass was muddy and too loud, other said it was way deficient, other said it was twangy, and my best was the guy who said it sounded like “sh-beeep-t” !!
After watching your presentation here, I now realize that everybody’s room or listening source is different, hence the difference in replies.
Dan, between this video and the previous, I would like to just say thank you! This is some stuff that has particular relevance for me (and many others) I'm sure right now. Once again, thank you.
I cannot wait for the Dan Worrall satnav update. I know I will end up getting where I need to be then
Ironically I have no sense of direction whatsoever, and don't know how I coped before Google maps.
This would be a huge success!
@@DanWorrall lol
Thanks Dan. Really clear tutorial. Love the bits about how the brain translates the waveforms. Its really amazing. We are immersed in such natural creativity and intelligence - and so unaware of it!
wow this video is awesome Dan, the concept of our brain correcting room reflections in real time really blew my mind and answered a lot of questions, thanks we really need more of these types of videos
@5:00 actually blows my mind. Never even thought about that.
Your videos are truly amazing. You just blew my mind🤯
This is so good. Some of the best advice on mixing/mastering I’ve ever come across.
I actually never thought about why don’t we put just one microphone in any room and just record everything “as we hear it”. It’s crazy what our brain does. Very good “podcast” =). Getting used to something is really key. And most people don’t do it. They just build a homestudio and listen to music elsewhere. Even with headphones. Anyway. You said it all. Always a pleasure learning from you. Thanks.
Thumbs up!
The adaptation during a dialogue mix kicks in so fast that I have to pause after two or three loops, maybe play with more preroll to get a good reference again. It's quite scary sometimes even after over 20 years of dialogue mixing experience.
Good rooms to record in are such a treasure, even when you have to make one with rolling absorbers.
I'll often use closed headphones when phasing the mic around with my field recorder, studio voice or instrument. Only way for me to judge it well enough if I'm alone.
This channel absolutely blows my mind
Great points here. Understanding the physical cues the brain uses to make sense of the environment, and how these translate to our real-life 3D perception vs listening to a recording playback from monitors, is one of the best insights to have as an engineer. This, alongside the nature of how the brain adapts to the sounds, in relation to ear fatigue and perceptual distortion. A profound explanation indeed! Thanks Dan
man that got deep and I was all for it. Love your videos.
I love everything you said, especially the confidence boost near the end
This was eye-opening. Thank you.
So refreshing! Like a cool chilling breeze in the middle of the music-technology desert
I use Dirac room correction. AND created a curve that, after adjusting several times, got me to a sound more or less as expected in different systems. Def not a flat curve. Just one that translates. The magic of it is that I can move to whatever studio and apply the same curve after remeasuring and the results are going to be very consistent to my own studio.
A key ingredient in making mixes translate in my opinion - that might be obvious - is the song itself...Songwriting, composition, use of 'space', use of complementary octaves, etc.
I find that a really meticulously composed or well thought out song can easily translate on the worst speakers, rooms, listening environments. But sometimes a really special song can sound so interesting too...
So for me often the question becomes: how far can I push this to translate before I am ruining the unique characteristics of the song itself and I am hurting the song rather than helping it.
I've been trying to record and mix my own music (drums, bass, guitars, organ, vocals, hand percussion etc...basic rock) for some years. I've always been very bad at it. I THINK I finally worked out what the problem is. Just like you said...you need a very well thought out song...good solid arrangement and recorded to the best of your ability. I spent years with the mindset that "if I managed to play it and record it"...it was good. It's not. You need the best possible arrangement and the best possible tracks you can achieve. Only then will you have a hint of a hope of mixing something decent.
I know all this stuff but it's so nice to hear someone else expounding it. Besides, your delivery is great and you're succinct with it. When I have to preach to the neophytes I'm nowhere near as polite.
A true genius. Thanks for another masterpiece, Dan
Perfect room is 'asymptote' (the idea that Dan explained about reducing gains...it a point that is never achieved)
A great mix is analog to a great photo...it highlights the power of bokeh or focus and blur.
Good mixes can use any of those 'bad' cues ie rooms etc; ie the become the painting 'value key'
The power of the art of mixing is parallel to using dynamic space (HDR), focus using landscape cues (transient/eq).
RE Translation: To fix most of the low frequency issues for bedroom producers, sure use room/trapping etc BUT tactile feedback (especially at low volumes) is the most trusting tool.
On top of Dans great advice here is a reasonably simple thing I hinge bottom end checking on;
1. A good referencing plugin built into your workflow so that its a 1 button press to AB
AND
2. Install a tactile transducer into your listening chair with a reasonable cutoff (I use 100hz) and use the AB reference button A LOT at first. After a while you will use it a lot less but comparative kinetics will struggle to lie ie the transient and vibration
This was good to re listen too. Just trying to rethink my room a little.
It occurred to me that all I have on my massive desk is a keyboard and a mouse. Maybe I don’t need a huge desk at all!
But alas, it’s good to remember not to get too bogged down in these things - do what you can with what you have got, then get back to work!🎉
Please do a podcast! I love these types of videos.
Pure gold - thanks Dan!
If you want great bass absorbtion you should add purple and yellow crystals on top of your corner traps. Also: bass tube traps DIY style fix a room if you put in enough of them
When you are that smart that even with a waveform you realize that changing the colours might catch more visual attention... And as always, amazing information and perfectly explained. Thank you!
Not just the things we are used to hear are somehow constructed. There is also the theorie from Peter Berger & Thomas Luckmann (two incredible sociologists) which is about the idea, that what we call objective society is socially constructed.
If you have time and space for a good book its called ‚The social construction of reality‘.
Lovely framing of the topic.
Your videos are treasure! Keep enlightening us.
I've treated my room with a bunch of stuff laying around. Thats why my parents loses all their arguments when it comes to clean up my room. I really do need the 12 empty pizza boxes for the accoustics. And that is not a pile of laundry on my bed. It's a bass trap. The dishes are perfect for diffusion.
TBH this raises more questions for me then it answers
- how fast does this brain correction takes place?
- does it really correct for spectrum curve, not just the echo and resonances you talked about in the beginning?
- why are so many people still so happy about room correction software like Sonarworks? shouldn't your brain already adjust for these minor imperfections?
- I don't really know, but my intuition is that most of it happens very quickly (almost instantly) but some of it is much slower and more gradual.
- The spectrum curve is a result of reflections. It's a mistake to think of this as separate to the 'reverb': it's all reflections ultimately.
- to the extent that EQ room correction works, it's just the same as upgrading the monitors or adding acoustic treatment: your brain has to work less to decode what it's actually hearing, mixing becomes easier (and more enjoyable).
@@DanWorrallThank you so much, that helps a lot!
Best audio content, period.
wow this is a gem. thank you dan.
Insane insight! Thanks Dan
I'd just like to add that with room acoustics it's not only about frequency response of the room but also about reverberation in different frequency ranges. When considering any room correction system one have to think about the fact that it will only correct frequency response and not issues with reverberation.
I mix in an LA apartment bedroom and haven’t been able to completely treat it. But I’ve listened to a ton of reference material and just learned to compensate for its shortcomings. Example; my monitors have various correction dip-switches for placement scenarios so I tuned it so that my reference material was just on the *verge* of feeling boomy in really bass heavy music. But not actually boomy yet. This way I know, if my low end gets boomy I have a problem, but I’m not masking potential problems either. My wife’s car stereo is brutal for low end/low mids getting muddy, but I found a good balance in my room without spending a fortune where my mixes sound balanced on different playback systems. I still reference every mix on multiple playback systems before sending though, including Apple earbuds haha
6:45 -- In theory, if you have a zero (notch) in the frequency response, you can fix it by putting a pole (undamped resonance) in its position and recover the original signal. No information is lost. Linear systems don't destroy information. The problem here is when wide enough frequency intervals get attenuated too much. Then when you boost those intervals to recover the signal, you boost noise as well. And often enough parts of the frequency response are well below the noise floor, so you're just amplifying noise there.
What would happen in reality if you tried to fix a notch-filtered signal "perfectly", is that the noise would keep feeding the resonant filter and you'd end up with a nasty ever-intensifying tone where the notch used to be. With no noise whatsoever you wouldn't have a problem, but zero noise is an impossibility in reality.
I had isolated nearfield monitors (original NS10Ms and Dynaudio BM15s) in a treated environment and they were fine, but I got rid of all of that and now mix in just Neumann NDH-30 headphones. Couldn't be happier with it. Actually maybe I could be with Audeze LCD-5s.
Some of the pre-eminent mixing engineers are removing the room from the equation by mixing primarily on headphones and then checking their mixes on various monitors.
Well said.. no one talked about this.. but this is what it is.. thank you dan! We love you from India! ❤️
you are such a welcomed presence to the internet mixing advice community!!!
I kinda tripped into "semi professional" territory. The "studio" was an open kitchen, which had been treated better than our current room. I've been elected the new engineer, so I'm still trying to figure everything out.
When we recorded some bass, we put the amp into the bedroom next door and built a cave around the cab from anything soft. A small couch, cushions, heavy blankets ... it looked super scetchy, but contained the sound beautifully.
Can you recommend some learning material about acoustic and bass traps in particular? Our new room is as wide as it's tall, which isn't ideal and our room treatment isn't great.
Thanks Dan, your tutorials are amazing!
This also explains to me my lifelong (futile) struggle to get "the" sound in the room of my guitar on tape. Äh, disc. No use in trying, just get a good version on how a great rock guitar sounds on record. The latter always felt like a defeat. But it isn't, right? Thx for this video podcast, Dan.
1:02 never a truer word spoken! I have been chasing a flat response for about 18 months, and you get closer and closer and spend more, and more and you never actually get there. You pull back more and more layers of an onion that has more and more issues hiding beneath each layer. Yeah, you see an improvement with every panel and Bass trap but you also see the next issue.
What was once a random 12db null in the frequency response (same as all the other 12-15db nulls) is now a *big* 12db null that didn’t go away as everything else flattened out….so, more panels and bass traps…and so it goes on.
Also, treating a room properly is very very expensive. Just FYI.
1” Foam is garbage. Minimum 4” panels if you want any chance of treating Bass below 250hz. 6” if you want to treat Bass below 100hz
Great Video as Always! It all start with the room!
Genius. Thanx for that. Gave me a complete new set of aspects to think about mixing and mastering.
Very good sumup of the mixer/masterer situation when working ! Thanks for the refreshement !
i’m so glad i found this channel!
I always thought that one of the reasons a sound source sounds different directly hearing it in the room it is in, and hearing it after it's been recorded, was mostly due to the microphone you record it with, and the monitoring system you use to listen to it.
Our ears are pretty much microphones, right? And they have their own frequency response, like a microphone. But a microphone's frequency response is going to be very different from your ear's response (and from other microphones' responses). I've always though of having microphones as just having different-sounding ears at your disposal. So, the sound captured by a microphone is always different from the sound captured by your ears (not to mention we always hear with two ears, but we don't always mic things with 2 microphones).
Then comes your monitoring system, being a set of speakers or headphones, which are very similar to microphones. They also have their own frequency response, which shapes the frequency content of what you just recorded even further (not to mention the new room you're in, which is also part of your monitoring system, and which I though also contributed to this greatly, and all the cables and equipment the signal goes through as well).
So it made perfect sense to me that I would hear things in the recording that I wasn't hearing when I was in the room, because the microphes, the speakers, and everything inbetween were contributing to this tonal-shaping train of doom, accentuating stuff I couldn't hear before.
So I was totally wrong, then? It's mostly our brains' doing? Or is it a mix of everything?
Cheers man, love your videos!
(sorry if my english is messy, I'm not a native speaker)
Love your videos and the way you explain!
Nice video!
extra notres : Frequency response of speakers at listening position ca be adjusted-corrected (to a vertain amount) after measurements with sonarwotks.
And some emulation of listening system for headphones like Realphone may also worth taking a look.
The only thing I would add to Chad's comment is that you're mix doesn't have to sound perfect in the studio, on the hi-fi, in the car, on ear buds, on your phone... it has to sound comperable to reference mixes of your choice on those systems. Even superb mixes don't sound great firing off an mp3 on your phone BUT if you can get your mix to sound comperable to them then you know you have done the best that you can do.
Splendid
Thank you very much for your videos - they have helped a lot. Love the quality of your voiceover, too.
My answer to that posted comment would have been:
Recorded music plays back through a speaker or speakers. Whatever space, environment or room that the speakers are in, and emits sound from…has nothing to do with how the recording was originally mixed or mastered.
It’s just you & your perception of sound within that space that will tell you if it’s perfect…to you. Also are you a DJ?
Dan, you need a TV program, this is just not enough. Thoroughly enjoying every next video you put online, thank you :)
That was great - Thanks Dan
Agree with everyone on how much of a human being you sound in regards to mixing, but dude! What a visualiser! Is this an openGL script or something in after effects? Makes me too curious 😋☺️
Reaper video processor :)
That waveform brings up some memories from the Blue Man Group's "The Complex Rock Tour"
... "it's time to start! *PVC noises*"
keep doing what you do because it's all tremendous.
I could listen to you all day... and now will make it my mission to.
mind-blowing. thanks man
Absolutely brilliant advice! Thank you!
Thank you 🍀
Thank you, Dan!!!
Very intelligent. Thank you.
Thank you so much!
Stunning. Thank you!
Thanks Dan
I had a big studio with all the fancy stuff you can imagine and now after 40 years I work on a MacBook speaker and headphones and I make much better-sounding music than before I remember one thing very well at the time of the studio I had TAD speakers valued now around 70/100 thousand euro very beautiful speaker to listen to but if you mix on that one the result was something absolutely unbalanced so at the end, all the mix was made on the Yamaha ns10 and the auratone Thank you to clarify concept very difficult to understand
Always enlightening.
I would love to hear your take on yamaha ns-10s
Absolutely a valid option, but you have to get used to the way they sound and consciously aim for a bass light mix. Personally I prefer mixing on full range monitors with a subwoofer, I just find it more enjoyable.
That bit about your brain compensating for a room was very interesting.
What if I record noise with a mic, then compare the recording to the original then EQ the recording to sound like the original?
2:37 paused my first viewing to write this so forgive me if I'm missing the point but by that logic could you not reason that when listening to a live band in, say, a small room, one hears not the separate instruments but rather a single, complex pressure gradient, or, one in each ear. This in turn is decoded in one's head.
Now resuming video playback...
4:20 I think I've missed the point. I'll leave this up as a reminder to myself to watch the full video before commenting.
Yes you could. And you could make the counter argument that in that case you could move your head to gain different perspectives...
My mixes translate so much better since I use Slate VSX headphones. Those emulate different rooms / speakers (car, studios, boombox, club etc). You can listen to your mix in those different rooms / speakers and it gives a pretty good feedback on how the mix sounds there / where mixing problems are. Was always struggling with mix translation. Not anymore. 🙂
It’s amazing how the brain’s decoding makes it possible to listen to recorded music, a single blip in evolutionary history
i appreciate you not using a painful 1kHz sine wave but a much lower one which is much more pleasing
Just ran into your channel and your content is amazing. I wish I could subscribe to you another 100 times. Thank for sharing your knowledge.
Indeed, I tell my peers that music might be subjective but sound is objective. As young guru put it, "At at the end of the day it's two speakers, does it sound good? And also, you need to have enough practice to just do things, like the way you don't actively think about breathing or walking"
What a legendary lesson
So if you´re under budget and/or tenant agreement limits, what´s your advice for this situation: Depending on where you stand, the perceived sound of reference material varies between awesome and awful, partially bass heavy as when you enter the club and start hearing the music. There are sweet spots, that´s where the mixing position is. But it´s next to impossible to break from sitting at the mixing desk, which is something I like to do so I don´t exhaust my hearing or concentration. So would you rather aim for an improved overall sound at a majority of positions in the room or focus on improving acoustics at the workplace?
I'd focus on your mix position first. But, if the sound in your mix position is dramatically different to the rest of the room it might be worth trying a different room configuration. Try facing a different wall, if that's possible...
@@DanWorrall Many thanks for your advice! There aren´t many alternatives to the mix position I´m afraid, but that´s ok - sound is about right in that spot. The differences aren´t that big around the mix position (2-3m), but the larger the distance, the worse it gets (8-9m). Basically it´s two rooms (4x5 and 5x6m) in an L shape with no wall in between. I thought about keeping the mix position as it is and maybe go for a second speaker set in the other area, then switch when breaking from the desk.
It has been said before, but I need to repeat others: Thank you for delivering so many great insights, it´s a pearl in the sea of information out there.