Music Recording Blog - Home Studio Essentials

"Everything In It's Right Place" is my general philosophy towards mixing (and also the title of an excellent song by Radiohead.)

What I mean by this is that the ultimate goal when mixing a song together should be to find a "place" for every part of the song that's essential (and this is an important point because with most mixes there are elements that are not essential that should be cut out of the mix in order to leave more room for everything else.)

There are three basic things that I think about when trying to make the mix work: Frequency/EQ, Dynamics, & Panning.

Frequency/EQ

It's important not to have multiple elements of your song fighting for the same frequency space. When you have lots of "fighting" among instruments/vocals for the same frequency space it ends up making all of those elements harder to hear. It sort of turns it into "mush."

The first instinct of people is often to try to boost certain frequencies with EQ to try to get an instrument more clear. Sometimes people will solo an instrument and get sounding just right with EQ adjustments (often boosting some frequencies to get a "brighter"  or "fuller" sound) and this can make the instrument sound great on it's own.

The problem is that unless you're doing a solo instrumental recording, that instrument isn't going to be heard on it's own, it's going to be heard in the context of the full mix. And what usually happens in this scenario is that as soon as you bring in everything else the mix sounds bad.

The key is not to applying EQ adjustments when a track is solo'd because it doesn't matter how an instrument sounds on it's own, only how it sounds within the mix. What you really need to do is to get the instrument to sound good with all of the other parts going on at the same time. And usually the key here is not so much EQ boosts on an instrument mix but EQ cuts on the other instruments that are getting in the way.

Dynamics

I'm not a fan of over compression. I don't like the modern rock sound where everything is compressed to the point where it's just one continuous loud sound. I can't stand it actually.

But I don't mean to go off on a rant here, what I'm trying to talk about is the elements of dynamics and why you need to think about this when you're mixing a song.

I think it's important to first think about this when you're arranging a song. Why try to "create dynamics" in the mix when you could create it with the arrangement of the song in the first place?

What am I talking about? To put it simply I'm saying instead of having everything going on at once, you should have different parts come in at opportune times. If you listen to great recordings closely (and this is something you should be doing if you want to make your own mixes) you should notice how different elements come in at different times during the song. For example if you have a great guitar riff it doesn't go through the whole song, it comes in at certain times where it has the most impact and so that it doesn't get stale by just repeating endlessly.

But this is only one type of dynamics, what people usually think of when this term is used is compression. And yes, compression is important but too many people are abusing it and creating really lifeless mixes because of it.

Most instruments (including vocals) will sound better with compression applied and it's important to realize that compression is not some new thing unique to modern recording. For example, The Beatles used compression on virtually all of the parts of their songs (but they usually used it in a much less intrusive way than is usually the approach today.)

I really recommend starting off with a "less is more" approach with compression. When you start to hear it as an effect, that means you've probably gone too far. (I'm not totally against the idea of using compression as an effect, if it sounds interesting - that's cool - but the sort of over compressed "one volume" modern rock sound is truly awful and I hope it dies a horrible death as soon as possible.)

I also recommend using your ears. Presets and recipes are of very little use when applying compression. You must listen closely to how the settings are effecting your song and then adjust those settings accordingly. I do not want to go into the details of what "attack," "threshold," and "ratio" mean (at least not in this post) but you should really understand what these things mean and, most importantly, what adjusting these settings sounds like.

Panning

I look at panning as a way of creating a "space" for each element of my mix to live. This is especially important when you've got parts that have overlapping frequencies. You can help make those parts audible by panning them away from each other.

But, while I think panning is an important tool - I try not to rely on it. In fact, I like to get my mixes sounding clear when in mono before I start to think about panning for my stereo mix.

Overview

I want to go into a lot more detail on mixing in the future, with this post I am just giving a sort of overview of my approach towards mixing. I think the "takeaway" from this should be that applying adjustments while a track is solo'd is not a good idea and that you should think about cutting EQ from other instruments before boosting EQ on the target instrument. Clarity comes from removing what's not necessary from a mix.

I recently got REAPER POWER! from Amazon and I've been extremely impressed with it so far. It's helping me to see how much of REAPER's capabilities I've been missing (you can try out REAPER for free by the way, and a personal use license is only $60.)

I keep finding out about new things I can do with this software and new ways I can streamline my work flow so that I can work in a more efficient way. When you're trying to do something creative you want to be able to do all of the technical things as easily as possible.

If you're a REAPER user (and I don't think I'm ever going to go back to using any other DAW) then I definitely recommend getting this guide. It's great.

As you may have heard, The Beatles music is finally coming out digitally but not in the way most people assumed it would (as downloads on iTunes & AmazonMP3) but instead on this Apple (Beatles Apple, not Mac Apple) themed Beatles USB stick. Along with the 320kbps (high quality) mp3s, this USB stick also includes The Beatles entire remastered stereo catalog in 24bit FLAC and that's what interests me.

As you probably already know (since you're reading this blog on home recording) 24bit is the standard for digital mixing and mastering these days. It's not until the final stage that the music is exported to 16bit for CDs.

When The Beatles music was digitally remastered for the new box sets (and now this USB which is a digital version of The Beatles Stereo CD Box Set) it was done so in 192kHz 24bit quality but of course we ended up hearing it in 44kHz 16bit quality (on the CDs.) These CDs still sound fantastic to my ears, but certainly I'm curious to hear the music in it's full quality.

The 24bit FLAC files included on this Beatles USB are not full quality, they are only 44.1kHz but they are still the highest quality versions of these remasters now available because they are 24bit rather than the 16bit that is on CDs.

There's a chance that The Beatles will eventually go the Blu-Ray route like Neil Young's Archives and include the full 192kHz 24bit files for our listening pleasure, but for now The Beatles USB represents the audiophile peak for The Beatles stereo catalog.

I recently purchased my first Floyd Rose style guitar and at first I was a bit lost as to how to tune it. I actually got a bit frustrated and regretted my purchase of it at first. But after some research and some trial & error I figured it out and I'm now very pleased with the guitar (it's a Jackson.)

It seems like a good idea to share what I've learned about how to tune a Floyd Rose guitar what follows are some step by step directions on tuning such a guitar as the steps are a bit different than with a "normal" guitar.

1. Make sure all of the fine tuning screws are about half way up (so that you can adjust either way if you need to.)

2. Loosen (unlock) the nut.

3. Use the tuning keys to tune the strings (I recommend tuning them slightly sharp as they tend to go a bit flat at first.) There's a specific way you should tune the strings. Start with the low (bass) E then go to the high (treble) E then go to the B then the A then the G and then finally the D. Then you start again at the low E and continue this process until it's staying in tune.

This will take awhile at first and you need to have some patience. But it's worth it in the long run so stick with it.

4. Once you've got it staying pretty well in tune you should tighten the nut (lock it.) Don't screw it closed too tight.

5. Fine tune with the fine tune screws. This is how you'll be tuning the guitar from now on unless it goes very far out of tune or you have to restring (in which case you'll have to start this process over again.) The big positive is that Floyd Rose guitars tend to stay in tune more so than others do once you get them set. That's what I've been experiencing with mine.

Changing The Strings

Speaking of changing the strings. You should change them one at a time. Because of the way you string a Floyd Rose guitar, that's easier to do with other guitars. If you try to change them all at once you could run into some irritating problems with the bridge.

Pianoteq is a different kind of piano sampler because it's not actually a piano sampler at all. Instead it's a piano "modeler." I don't know exactly what that means technically but what I do know is that it sounds more realistic than samplers do to my ears and it also takes up a lot less space on the computer!

On top of the very realistic sound that you can get with this VST instrument, there's also the great variety of ways that you can adjust the sound (you can change the tuning, the mic position, you can choose from a large variety of different pianos.)

But what you really want to hear is an example of what it sounds like. That's why I'm including Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata" as played by Pianoteq below. I've actually only got Pianoteq 2.3 (Pianoteq 3 is the latest version and it's what's available now) and I still think it sounds amazing. In fact, I think it sounds so good that I haven't bothered upgrading to Pianoteq 3 even though it's supposed to be even better.

***EDIT***

Due to a bogus copyright claim by WMG, the PianoTeq version of "Moonlight Sonata" was taken down by YouTube. Apparently it sounded so realistic that they thought it was actually a recording of a pianist playing "Moonlight Sonata" that they have under copyright. I think that's actually pretty good proof of how great PianoTeq sounds.

Obviously the song itself (being a Beethoven composition that is about 200 years old) is not under copyright, so the only explanation is that they thought the recording itself was under their copyright. Of course this wasn't actually a recording at all. It was the PianoTeq software "playing" the song.

***END EDIT***

I recommend the SL-990 weighted MIDI keyboard to take full advantage of the power of this piano modeler software. A huge part of what makes Pianoteq sound so real is that there's basically an unlimited amount of variety in the velocity (which is different from samplers which have a limited variety as far as velocity goes) and of course you need a weighted keyboard to take advantage of that aspect. The SL-990 is what I use and I love it.

I really recommend anyone that is into recording their own music (or recording other people's music) at home buy The Beatles Remastered Box Sets.

Why? Regardless if you are a fan (I happen to be a huge fan of The Beatles) you cannot deny their huge influence on music over the last 40+ years. I think because of this, it's necessary for anyone who is serious about music to be familiar with their music and there's definitely no better way to get familiar with their music than with these box sets (they're all I've been listening to over the last couple of days and they sound amazing.)

Being ignorant of The Beatles work while trying to record music is sort of like being ignorant of Shakespeare and trying to write plays.

There's so much that can be learned from The Beatles albums. Both as far as their music itself and as far as their recording techniques. While their music was recorded over 40 years ago, it still sounds better than just about anything recorded today (to my ears) - why is that? And how can you incorporate some of the things that makes their music eternally fresh into your own music?

I think both the mono & stereo box sets are essential because they both sound great, but they sound great in different ways. The mono box set is quite amazing to hear for me as it's the first time I've heard their songs as they were originally intended to be heard (The Beatles were focused primarily on the mono mixes in the 1960s.) It's impressive how great they were able to get these recordings to sound working in mono.

I think there is a lesson in that too.

A trick I've been using and will continue to use after being inspired by The Beatles in mono is to mix my music in mono first. I try to make my mixes sound as good as possible in mono before even worrying about how it sounds in stereo. I've found that if you do your panning while you are in mono, you can usually find the perfect fit. That may sound counter intuitive to you but I recommend trying it for yourself.

I'm not much of a "gear head" when it comes to guitars. My theory is pretty much that if it stays in tune, it's a good guitar.

I'm definitely not of the mind that you need to buy some extremely expensive model guitar in order to have a "good guitar." I think the proof that's true comes from the fact that all of guitarists of The Beatles (John Lennon, Paul McCartney, and George Harrison) played Epiphone Casino guitars (Epiphone being Gibson's less expensive brand) on recordings and during tours.

If they were good enough to record Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, & The White Album with then they are certainly good enough to record whatever I'm working on.

Buy An Epiphone Casino Guitar Online

An important part of recording music (or doing anything else that takes considerable computing power such as graphic design or video editing) is having an OS that works smoothly without giving you any technical headaches. An OS that works with all of your various sound programs without any hiccups.

That's why the 10/22/09 release of Windows 7 Professional is so exciting (particularly for those who currently have the pain in the ass that is known as Vista.) It works. It really does. I know this from personal experience because I've been a beta tester for it. But I'm not the only one - if you look around the web you'll find that many people have had great success with it.

I became a beta tester for Win 7 Pro precisely because of all of the problems I was running into with Vista. I couldn't figure out a way to deal with them (I won't list all the problems I was having as that would take me all day.) So I decided to try out Win7 to see if it was really all it was cracked up to be (I had heard a lot of great things about it on recording forums.)

Sure enough, all of my problems went away. And just as importantly, no new problems were introduced. So yes, I can give my own 100% recommendation to buy Windows 7 Professional.

Buy Windows 7 Pro

Buy Windows 7 Pro Upgrade
(upgrade from XP & Vista)

I've just purchased The Beatles As Musicians: Revolver Through The Anthology and I wanted to pass word to any other Beatles fanatic home recording people out there who may be interested in it because I think this book looks fascinating.  Of course I haven't read it yet to give any kind of real review of it. I'll try to get to that once it's delivered.

I've read a lot of Beatles books over the years but most of them have been focused more on the biography of the band than on the creation of the music itself. That's what this book is about and that's why I can't wait to get my hands on it.

There's also a second book by the same author (which was actually written after this one) which focuses on The Beatles earlier stuff (through Rubber Soul) but since I'm more interested in their later stuff I figured I would just get this one first to see what it's like before buying the second one.

Can you really learn how to write great songs by reading a book? Well I don't know. But it seems to me that it's a good idea to be open to learning new things if you want to improve your understanding of music.

And for this reason (and because of the excellent Amazon reviews) I decided to buy these two books on songwriting (which are both by Rikky Rooksby.)

Melody: How To Write Great Tunes

This book (as you can tell by the title) is focused writing melodies. I've just started reading it and I'm already finding it very interesting. Has it inspired me to write my very own "Yesterday" ? Well not quite yet. But I don't expect miracles, just building blocks of knowledge that I can work with. It comes with a CD so you can hear examples of what you're reading about. This is essential since music is, of course, a listening art.

How To Write Songs On Guitar

This book is focused on helping those of us who write songs on our guitar. While it doesn't include a CD, it does give plenty of examples for what it's talking about and if you have a decent music collection you'll be able to listen to these songs which is just as effective a technique as including the audio CD, I think.