Some sounds just overlap in frequency too much and don't really work together. Sometimes I'll replace one of the sounds because of this, other times I just avoid using them at the same time -- i.e. if the chords and bass don't work together, use a different bass in the part with the chords.

You have to consider where you're playing the notes. This also corresponds to the octave range you choose the oscillators to be in.

It's easy to continue to stack layers that are in the same range/octaves and have it clash.

You do have a good suggestion about choosing the right sound, because the characteristics do influence the play between the layers.

It depends on the severity of the drowned out nature you're speaking off.

Assuming, you're using the word literally, it's a combination of EQ, Volume, Panning, and stereo width adjustment.

Those ideas are the fundamental to my mixing technique and seem to be the basis for other people, regardless if they say so. It's a common technical skill to understand those fundamentals before moving on to other things.

Your clarity would come from using just those simple tools on your mixer channel.

That being said, and given the information you have presented, it seems like you may not be balancing things correctly based on frequency content of the individual element in your track.



You might need to understand how amplitude effects those frequencies in order to best project them in the mix.

IE, you need less volume for top end elements than you do for bottom end elements. Because of how fast the vibrations travel over time (aka cycles, aka frequency)

top end content needs less to be project, bottom end needs more to be projected.

I also suggest you strip away ALL your effects from the project, and try to get a mixdown with EQ, Volume, Panning, and stereo width adjustment.(take note of what you have right now, as it might change later, and you can reapply with a new understanding hopefully)

If you do this, you it should help you get a better picture of what you're dealing with and potentially eliminate any other unnecessary variables that you may not be considering.

Plus, using those tools as your foundation will help you identify problems better in the future as you get to do more complicated things with your ears.

I use a pre master track because i wanted to check certain buss effects that are in PRE fader settings, such as the buss reverb.

If i pull the premaster down, i can hear all the PRE effect settings.

I got this idea when ever i was using reaper to mix. Reason doesn't have the same functionality as reaper, so to emulate it i routed my groups to a pre master.

Rather than muting individual channels, i just mute the pre master. And that's kind of the basis for my grouping philosophy.

One other thing i do is a low cut and a hi cut on the pre master. in reason, low filter and hi filters are set to a max at 20hz and 20khz. And that's like the maximum i think their eq's go, which you don't need to go higher than that.



And after writing this, and thinking back....I find that the premaster channels allows for a completely dry mix to be achieved, because there's no other signal other than your inputs that are going into it. This maybe a function of reason, but if i were to render out my pre master track, i'd get all my input signals with no buss/aux effects on it.

So to me, it separates the mix a bit further with the buss/aux/send effects and the input signals.

But outside of the filters, i don't mess with it.

^ good for you dude!

I'm also pretty unorganized... I usually make busses for sidechaining purposes, so often I have one for bass and one for "other stuff". Otherwise I only make a bus when I need to apply something like a filter on multiple instruments. But nowadays I also try to minimize the number of mixer tracks I work with, so all sound design happens in the synth or in Patcher.

Yea, A good portion of my sound design comes from reason's combinator. An alternative to that is the image line's patcher. I also think ableton's effect rack offers the same functionality, but that's at a glance.

The cool thing with reason's combinator is you can drop in the original mixing board and you have access to more parallel/buss channels before you get to the main mixer board. So you can do some pretty fun things with the routing, which is a personal favorite activity of mine.

To a point you make, I also try to put the least amount of tracks in my songs as well.

If you make the signal going into the mixer really rich and can control it, you don't really need a whole lot else to slap on it aside for more "aesthetic" effects on the sound to make it stand out a little more.

Alright, I currently don't use busses for much in Ableton.

Convince me on why I should start?

Organization. "Oh i need to quickly check out quite a few things to see if they sit right with this other few things and gauge it off of another few things"
"so instead of me individually selecting things i can just throw what is sonically similar and then mute that section"

"oh wow, i did all that work in that short amount of time? i must be  PRO!"

better organization leads to more efficient workflow which leads to a better creative process which leads to more work being done which leads to getting better which leads to droppin panties and bro collabs.

It really shines if you have a template as discussed above, and you basically go from there, routing any thing related to that section from the start.

I am stressing this to my little brother as he makes tunes on fruity loops, but he's learning other life organizational skills as a teenager ATM.

it's not like it's going to hurt any thing, and it might give you a better picture because it compartmentalizes the mixing and creative process.

I'd like to add to what ZAU touched with his comment. The most common modes outside the familiar minor and major, the Dorian and Mixolydian, "feel" like minor and major, respectively; you can interpret a song in a Dorian mode as a minor with borrowed chords. So in principle you don't need to invoke modes in your thinking when writing music, you can just use a D major chord in A minor because it sounds frigging cool - case in point: the chorus of "Civilization" by Justice 

So you're playing a D major scale, but every thing else is in A minor?

Or, starting on the D in an A minor scale, causes the playing of the notes(of an A minor scale from the D position;for emphasis) to be characterized as a D major scale while being in A minor key?

I go even further on the simple note. I do Basses, Drums, sometimes FX. Everything else I mix ungroupped straight to the master.

I use to have all my channels straight into the master, then my friend convinced me that you have a little more flexibility in organizing.

I use reason, so i can't just move all the sliders at once, so i just make that ratio adjustment with the group.

The biggest thing is having some form of organization that you understand and can articulate when ever it's needed.

If you don't like it, don't use it.

If you like it, use it.

Either way, stop devolving into arguments and please try to stay constructive. We're all trying to learn and improve here, and calling other people elitist or stupid or anything like that doesn't help us accomplish that.

not devolving into argument, i am just saying that there will be more explanation towards a more fundamental understanding of music theory than there is to a lay man's view, as evident in this topic here.


All i was saying was, that please consider that when talking to people on the internet until you understand their understanding and communication level.

I am sorry you couldn't get that from my posts.

I know what people are talking about, but other people don't seem to consider the other person's knowledge when dealing with the question.

I mean, why would you blast all this stuff to a person who is learning when you should take baby steps? It's clearly evident in the person's question other wise OP wouldn't of even asked in the first place.
 Edit:i never singled any one out, it was an attack at the thoughts behind actions of insecure people.

NEVER, have i sensed that any one who posted here/on this topic was a snob or elitist.

Quote from: Mussar on April 06, 2016, 02:39:07 am

If you don't like it, don't use it.

If you like it, use it.

Either way, stop devolving into arguments and please try to stay constructive. We're all trying to learn and improve here, and calling other people elitist or stupid or anything like that doesn't help us accomplish that.

Lol. It is impossible to discuss modes without different opinions my friend. Back at the Ultimate Guitar forum they even made a sticky about them because they got tired of all the "mode" threads.

I don't find marrows post offensive at all. He was just trying to say that OP most likely doesn't understand a thing I said and that I should stop overcomplicating things with terminology they probably don't understand.

Fair enough.

The thing when it comes to music theory is that sometimes in order to understand the more advanced topics you need a solid foundation with the fundamentals. That's why grasping modes can be tough for some beginners because they might not have the foundation to actually understand them.

Sure it's easy to say that modes are just the scale starting on a different note. That's a perfectly fine definition.

With that being said the definition is completing lacking when it comes to the characteristics of a mode in the first place. Like Zau said, a #4 creates lydian. That's important to understand because then you know that if you want to create a modal chord progression you should emphasize that #4 to bring out the true characteristic of Lydian.

Finally what a mode is and what makes music modal is a completely different thing. The tonal center is what determines whether or not you'll be able to apply them in a music context in the first place. All of this depth we are losing by just saying "Modes are scales starting on a different note". I use this definition because it's the EASIEST thing for a beginner to grasp.

Music theory is like mixing though. If you don't practice it you won't get better. You can't master a compressor by reading about just like you can't master modes without practicing them.

Which is why improvising over modal backing tracks to me is the best way to learn what they are and how to train your ears to them. Learning by doing is just so important.

And lydian did a fine job of answering my question which has a little more detail about why the words are used. Thank you.


You can't expect an elementary level person to understand master level concepts. and music theory is convoluted enough with out using building blocks.