Of course, EQ-ing takes up majority of getting a clean mix, but it seems like you're looking for the extra 10% to clean your track up.

Compressors can reduce the dynamics of an instrument and can get one to sound smoother, punchier, or even just plain louder. There is usually a pre-EQ, then a compressor, and a slight post-EQ. As in terms of cleaning up a mix, they can really do that by stabilizing crazy dynamics, such as the attack of a clean guitar.

As far as the parameters go and how to apply them on specific instruments, that's something we need tangible examples for. There are always general guidelines for specific instruments, but in this day and age, there is so much more room to do things in different ways.

The threshold is the level of where the compressor will start to work--it anything above that threshold line will be compressed. The Ratio will decide how much everything above the threshold will be compressed. For example, a 1:1 ratio will not compress anything.

The attack is how much time the compressor will delay its activation. You can use this to shape transients (this is considered a bit old-school now that there are transient shapers out there, but still, of course, extreme viable). The release is how fast the compressor level returns back to 0db (this is a bit harder to explain without visual cues), but a faster release time will make it louder and sharper, and a longer release time will make it sound smoother and have a lot more volume ducking (provided dynamics are insane).


This is a simple formula of how it all works. Note that the output is not affected by a post-gain.

I'm gonna have to go with Wontolla here.

There is no need to overcomplicate mixes as I feel many producers do, especially new producers. You can get a decent to good mix with 'stock' plug-ins or even the simplest of tools within your limited arsenal. The ideal situation is that a producer of any caliber would have hands-on to equipment that accurately portrays the mix as much as possible, but none of that would be useful if they don't know what a good mix will sound like, or even how to achieve it.

If I were you, depending on your budget, I would invest in some decent to good open-back headphones, a set of monitors, and set up your room to absorb sound (you can do it the ghetto way, like putting blankets up on your walls if you have to, for now). Then, once you've got that down, start training your ears.

My biggest advice would be to keep your mix simple. No need to over-compress too much, no need to boost too many frequencies, and no need to distort or saturate way too much.

Side-chaining pretty well explained by the first few posts. The Gross Beat 'sidechain' preset is just volume ducking, and by definition not a sidechain.

Coming from someone who actually doesn't use much (or any, really) 'emptiness' in my music, it's definitely a good thing if utilized well. It's like repetition--repetition is a musician's best friend, only if utilized well.

Sorry, no. It's not just perception, understanding your equipment acoustically, or having trained ears. It's all of those and having precise equipment. I don't care if Savant or Jesus used Beats for his mixes, you're not either of them, and having poor equipment will give you bad habits for the untrained ears.

I'll say this though--the number of specific equipment to having a good mix (to an extent) is a lot wider with electronic music, but primarily because, in my opinion, of the loudness wars... you can get away with a lot of stuff. >_>

I agree with Monoverse, but another thing I'd like to point out is that Mastering is quite knowledge and practice intensive--a lot more than the popular consensus. There are many producers that believe mastering in the electronic music world (thus mastering in general) is brick-walling the shit out of your mix onto a shitty limiter... absolutely not. It's a whole art that requires a lot of practice and studying.

Before the days of modern electronic production, adding reverb on the entire mix was a common practice. The point was it would add a nice atmospheric effect on a subtle level. As a matter of fact, this practice is still done A LOT around non-electronic music still to this day. But because electronic music has so much leeway (well, more so than real instrumental mixes), you don't really have to... but try it out and see if you like it.

I don't know what other line of products Beats may have, but the one in question I assume are the consumer-grade ones. Having that said, absolutely not--you should never mix with consumer grade headphones, let alone Beats.

Consumer grade headphones are designed to make the playback sound better, not portray the playback accurately. As striving professionals, we should be using equipment that portrays the playback as accurate as possible. A while back, I bought ATH-M50's to mix with because they were the only studio headphones I could afford, but ATH-M50's are for tracking, not for mixing. When I switched to DT-880's, I noticed a lot of stray things I never noticed in my mixes before. This would occur more when I would visit a professional studio with NS10's and HS8's with a treated room and sound absorbing environment.

Imagine mixing on Apple earphones. That's like trying to paint in the dark.