Author Topic: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions? (Read 14196 times)

dcfuture · « **on:** September 01, 2016, 02:28:19 pm »

Hey guys, i'm currently reading a book on mixing, as I finished my first track ever from start to end (finally) and want to get my hands dirty already with the nitty gritty stuff.

I fully understand the process of mixing from a live bands standpoint. Get instruments in as raw as possible, it's usually all live recordings, so you gotta do your volume adjustments, panning, EQing. Getting everything blending right.

EDM, however, is not recorded live. You are making what you're hearing on the go, and thus are instantly applying things such as ducking, compression, EQing, reverb and delay effects. etc, on the go. Balancing volumes and also panning, all that jazz, because it shapes the way your song sounds and you're already hearing it live from the monitors. Am I right to assume that EDM is kind of mixed on the GO for a good 75% of it by the end of the track?

I'm sure there's a huge benefit to still sit down after a track is done and clean up the mix, find some inconsistencies, fix some EQing and volume automations, but as your EDM production is done, shouldn't the mixing be at least halfway there already?

I'm just trying to get into the understanding the mindset behind mixing, as from what I get it's just a lot of EQ, volume automation adjustements, and effects (effects often placed on your specific mix buses already because well it's an integral part of the sound design and effects you want the song to give out) and making sure it all sounds cohesive since EDM relies heavily on that to come out punching just right.

The book i'm reading talks clearly from a more live recording mixdown standpoint, and I just wanna know how to translate that into EDM and if my assumptions are correct about having our job done halfway already because of the very core way we produce our music.

Interested in hearing your thoughts about this

Marrow Machines · « **Reply #1 on:** September 01, 2016, 04:56:05 pm »

the thing about mixing EDM(and other more computer based genres) is that you have absolutely complete control over the sound that you want.

that being said, you can run into several avenues in regards to philosophy on the process.

There's still applicable knowledge to live recording when it comes to getting certain sounds in EDM.

to me, i feel it's important to understand past procedure in order to apply movement towards the future.

There's honestly no "mindset" when it comes to mixing EDM, as many artist and people will probably just say to do what you want to get the sound to be good.

And the "having no way" way, is exactly what EDM came from. obviously there's some considerations to the hearing threshold and taste, but for the most part if you have an understanding of how to balance a live recording/perspective, then you have more than enough tools for the job in the studio.

the main differences is that you can spend more time in the moment with the material, as you've captured it in some fashion, and spend an infinite amount of time processing it.

Another difference in the EDM style, is that you have consider the commercial accessibility of your music.

If you're interested in competing with the top dogs, then you have to reference yourself in that perspective.

What you should be asking yourself in terms of the mixing philosophy process, is if you want to compete on the level of the industry leaders.

if your answer is a no to that question, then you have more enough tools, resources, and research power to find your own answer as an artist.

PS; i also think that the whole EDM genre is more so driven by consumption of sample packs and presets on specific synths and vst. The homogenization of EDM, is easily marketed as that. So if you want to consider things in that way, then your answer might lie in the sample packs more so than how to mix things. Certain components of the mixdown require you to have that sound as a source. the rest feels like a slight augment, as you're not really "creating" from a blank canvas as the frame work is already there.

MMIC · « **Reply #2 on:** September 01, 2016, 05:38:55 pm »

Quote from: dcfuture on September 01, 2016, 02:28:19 pm

Am I right to assume that EDM is kind of mixed on the GO for a good 75% of it by the end of the track?

I can't speak for others, but that's exactly how I do it. I mix as I go; every time I layer another sound, I'll roughly adjust the volume, panning, EQ, etc. By the time I'm done writing, things generally sound pretty decent. Then, I'll listen through the entire song and fine tune things.

dcfuture · « **Reply #3 on:** September 01, 2016, 06:03:27 pm »

Quote from: MMIC on September 01, 2016, 05:38:55 pm

Quote from: dcfuture on September 01, 2016, 02:28:19 pm
Am I right to assume that EDM is kind of mixed on the GO for a good 75% of it by the end of the track?

I can't speak for others, but that's exactly how I do it. I mix as I go; every time I layer another sound, I'll roughly adjust the volume, panning, EQ, etc. By the time I'm done writing, things generally sound pretty decent. Then, I'll listen through the entire song and fine tune things.

Yeah that's how I go about it. Do most of the mixing as I place a new track, because otherwise I can't just way everything flat without working out volumes and EQ's, it sounds like shit already. It's not like i'm dealing with live recordings that were pieced and stemmed outside the box, it's live into my monitors as raw as it gets, so I might aswell tweak em now because otherwise i'm building blocks on a song that sounds muddy already.

The question I have however is, do you bounce tracks to audio? It seems tedious and counter productive to the whole mixing on the go thing. Because you'd have to bounce as raw as possible and then redo things previously automate such as volume, panning and EQ's, which I had already done while working on the original project. I posted that question of bouncing on reddit, people seem divided. I get the principle when going from live recordings, but since I already mixed the half of it, redoing it from bounced audio sounds like a step back.

Some swear by it, as a way to work with a more organized template, while others say the only difference is that you really might end up fogging up the CPU if you don't have a decent PC to process all those VST's at once. What's your take?

Mussar · « **Reply #4 on:** September 01, 2016, 07:16:18 pm »

The argument in favor of mixing as you go is that you save time - you're going to be mixing it anyways, so why not do it now?

The argument in favor of mixing at the end is that you allow yourself hyperfocus - instead of dividing your attention between composing and arranging and mixing and orchestrating, you're isolating the tasks and devoting all your mental energy to perfecting the mix.

I know tons of producers in multiple genres who mix as they go, and I know just as many who divide up their sessions into different projects based on what stage they're at in the songwriting process. All of them write amazing sounding music, and all of them have the same thing in common:

They always go back and change things later.

So why stress that much over which is the proper way to mix? You're not going to keep the mix you had during your first go at least 75% of the time if not 99% of the time. Instead, try to figure out the workflow that gets you the best mix possible for your personal production style!

I personally switch between both styles, mostly based on my whim at the moment. Sometimes I just mix as I add elements or as I feel that elements are out of place, and sometimes I'll save a whole new project session, pull all the faders down to -Inf, and try to do a fresh mix. Hell, sometimes I'll save a "Composition Mix" and a "Fresh Mix" just so I can compare and see which I like better! The important thing is that you're constantly trying to do better and you're constantly referencing other songs (and referencing on as many listening devices and in as many environments as possible).

MMIC · « **Reply #5 on:** September 01, 2016, 07:36:23 pm »

Quote from: dcfuture on September 01, 2016, 06:03:27 pm

The question I have however is, do you bounce tracks to audio? It seems tedious and counter productive to the whole mixing on the go thing. Because you'd have to bounce as raw as possible and then redo things previously automate such as volume, panning and EQ's, which I had already done while working on the original project. I posted that question of bouncing on reddit, people seem divided. I get the principle when going from live recordings, but since I already mixed the half of it, redoing it from bounced audio sounds like a step back.

Some swear by it, as a way to work with a more organized template, while others say the only difference is that you really might end up fogging up the CPU if you don't have a decent PC to process all those VST's at once. What's your take?

No, I don't bounce my tracks before I do my final mixdown. I think that's a bit excessive. Occasionally, I bounce some tracks (freeze or flatten with Ableton) that are CPU hogs, and also bounce stuff to cut off reverb tails and such. But then again, I don't have 50+ tracks per project, so who knows!

dcfuture · « **Reply #6 on:** September 01, 2016, 08:07:36 pm »

Quote from: Mussar on September 01, 2016, 07:16:18 pm

The argument in favor of mixing as you go is that you save time - you're going to be mixing it anyways, so why not do it now?

The argument in favor of mixing at the end is that you allow yourself hyperfocus - instead of dividing your attention between composing and arranging and mixing and orchestrating, you're isolating the tasks and devoting all your mental energy to perfecting the mix.

I know tons of producers in multiple genres who mix as they go, and I know just as many who divide up their sessions into different projects based on what stage they're at in the songwriting process. All of them write amazing sounding music, and all of them have the same thing in common:

They always go back and change things later. So why stress that much over which is the proper way to mix? You're not going to keep the mix you had during your first go at least 75% of the time if not 99% of the time. Instead, try to figure out the workflow that gets you the best mix possible for your personal production style!

I personally switch between both styles, mostly based on my whim at the moment. Sometimes I just mix as I add elements or as I feel that elements are out of place, and sometimes I'll save a whole new project session, pull all the faders down to -Inf, and try to do a fresh mix. Hell, sometimes I'll save a "Composition Mix" and a "Fresh Mix" just so I can compare and see which I like better! The important thing is that you're constantly trying to do better and you're constantly referencing other songs (and referencing on as many listening devices and in as many environments as possible).

Interesting, I think i'll stick to mixing on the go. it's hard to imagine people not mixing on the go and just laying down the track raw and straight. I mean the reason I do EQ, panning, and volume automation on the go is because otherwise the song sounds like trash midway. Say I have a nice drum loop for 8 bars, then a bassline hops in, that suddenly drowns out the kick. I hear it instantly.

I can't simply ignore it and keep working on my beat because to me that sounds off already. So i'll start doing some volume automation, here and there. EQing to remove muddyness and have clarity with all frequencies to breath. Also gives that headroom for my master (further down the line). By the end of it I have a decently mixed track, and then I assume would be the time to finetune that perhaps, I panned this kick to much at this part of the track, or the volume is too high here. Or I didn't EQ something enough, so I add a bit more.

At least that's the logic I see behind it, I see the reason why for live recording it works fine to separate the two, it's hard to imagine an EDM producer not do it on the fly as you can hear the imperfections and sounds out of balance if you leave all your gains at the same place in the bus and if you never slash any frequencies.

Marrow Machines · « **Reply #7 on:** September 01, 2016, 10:09:59 pm »

Quote from: dcfuture on September 01, 2016, 08:07:36 pm

Interesting, I think i'll stick to mixing on the go. it's hard to imagine people not mixing on the go and just laying down the track raw and straight. I mean the reason I do EQ, panning, and volume automation on the go is because otherwise the song sounds like trash midway. Say I have a nice drum loop for 8 bars, then a bassline hops in, that suddenly drowns out the kick. I hear it instantly.

I can't simply ignore it and keep working on my beat because to me that sounds off already. So i'll start doing some volume automation, here and there. EQing to remove muddyness and have clarity with all frequencies to breath. Also gives that headroom for my master (further down the line). By the end of it I have a decently mixed track, and then I assume would be the time to finetune that perhaps, I panned this kick to much at this part of the track, or the volume is too high here. Or I didn't EQ something enough, so I add a bit more.

At least that's the logic I see behind it, I see the reason why for live recording it works fine to separate the two, it's hard to imagine an EDM producer not do it on the fly as you can hear the imperfections and sounds out of balance if you leave all your gains at the same place in the bus and if you never slash any frequencies.

It's a pretty decent way to go if you're fixing things in the moment. the alternative is to make a list of things that need to be fixed.

If you take care of the problem right away in terms of the sound source and it's processing, you have a better reference point to base your mix off of when you actually complete the song content and start the mixing procedure.

Mussar · « **Reply #8 on:** September 01, 2016, 10:32:10 pm »

Quote from: dcfuture on September 01, 2016, 08:07:36 pm

Quote from: Mussar on September 01, 2016, 07:16:18 pm
The argument in favor of mixing as you go is that you save time - you're going to be mixing it anyways, so why not do it now?

The argument in favor of mixing at the end is that you allow yourself hyperfocus - instead of dividing your attention between composing and arranging and mixing and orchestrating, you're isolating the tasks and devoting all your mental energy to perfecting the mix.

I know tons of producers in multiple genres who mix as they go, and I know just as many who divide up their sessions into different projects based on what stage they're at in the songwriting process. All of them write amazing sounding music, and all of them have the same thing in common:

They always go back and change things later. So why stress that much over which is the proper way to mix? You're not going to keep the mix you had during your first go at least 75% of the time if not 99% of the time. Instead, try to figure out the workflow that gets you the best mix possible for your personal production style!

I personally switch between both styles, mostly based on my whim at the moment. Sometimes I just mix as I add elements or as I feel that elements are out of place, and sometimes I'll save a whole new project session, pull all the faders down to -Inf, and try to do a fresh mix. Hell, sometimes I'll save a "Composition Mix" and a "Fresh Mix" just so I can compare and see which I like better! The important thing is that you're constantly trying to do better and you're constantly referencing other songs (and referencing on as many listening devices and in as many environments as possible).

Interesting, I think i'll stick to mixing on the go. it's hard to imagine people not mixing on the go and just laying down the track raw and straight. I mean the reason I do EQ, panning, and volume automation on the go is because otherwise the song sounds like trash midway. Say I have a nice drum loop for 8 bars, then a bassline hops in, that suddenly drowns out the kick. I hear it instantly.

I can't simply ignore it and keep working on my beat because to me that sounds off already. So i'll start doing some volume automation, here and there. EQing to remove muddyness and have clarity with all frequencies to breath. Also gives that headroom for my master (further down the line). By the end of it I have a decently mixed track, and then I assume would be the time to finetune that perhaps, I panned this kick to much at this part of the track, or the volume is too high here. Or I didn't EQ something enough, so I add a bit more.

At least that's the logic I see behind it, I see the reason why for live recording it works fine to separate the two, it's hard to imagine an EDM producer not do it on the fly as you can hear the imperfections and sounds out of balance if you leave all your gains at the same place in the bus and if you never slash any frequencies.

I understand where you're coming from! However, there are some very real studies that have suggested task-switching reduces our overall focus and impedes our ability to complete work. obviously if the mixing issue is a distraction that's preventing you from completing work you should fix it, but you should try to focus on the task at hand instead of following your whims or tackling whatever is the most attention grabbing element at that moment.

Even if you're not dealing with live recorded audio, the way you approach a collection of sounds is much different than the way you approach a group of individual sounds. You might find that your lead line becomes the focus of your song, when it might otherwise get pushed into the background because of where it came in the production process.

It's helpful to get new perspectives on your music in any way possible - and looking at the song in an entirely new project, bounced down to audio, is a great way to do that! Even my old Ableton instructor, who mixes his songs as he goes, bounces his files down to a stem session for a final mixdown (and often again to a pre master for a dedicated mastering session).

All in all, as long as you like the end result, you do what you think is best. How you get there is irrelevant.

Paco Robles · « **Reply #9 on:** October 31, 2016, 06:27:41 pm »

The first big difference is a track of live music is sounds laid over time. EDM is headroom you fill with frequencies across a certain period of time.

That is to say, you want your live snare to sound huge? you just have nobody else play a note on the 2 and the 4. in EDM you will carve it through the rest of the sounds.

Marrow Machines · « **Reply #10 on:** December 07, 2016, 01:45:40 am »

Quote from: AndrewGek on December 06, 2016, 10:17:41 pm

My first thought is a different drum would probably make the difference. Any suggestions on a different kind of drum?

overhead and room mics.

Author Topic: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions? (Read 14196 times)

dcfuture

The thought process of mixing for EDM productions?

Marrow Machines

Re: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions?

MMIC

Re: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions?

dcfuture

Re: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions?

Mussar

Re: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions?

MMIC

Re: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions?

dcfuture

Re: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions?

Marrow Machines

Re: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions?

Mussar

Re: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions?

Paco Robles

Re: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions?

Marrow Machines

Re: The thought process of mixing for EDM productions