Month: March 2023

Balance is a mix is vital. But how should we as mix engineers begin this process? I have personally tried many different approaches, but the one that works for me is go for the part of the song that should be loudest and with the most instrumentation. Then take away from the tracks, going backwards. This way of creating balance is referenced by Mike Senior in “Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio” (Senior, 2019, p.133).

Mike suggests starting with the most important instrument first (like Mike Clink, Jack Douglas, Andy Johns, Tom Lord-Alge, Alan Parsons, and Tony Visconti) (Senior, 2019, p.135). This contrasts with some mix engineers (Bob Clearmountain, Chris Lord-Alge, Jack Joseph Puig and Cenzo Townshend) (ibid. p.135) that work across the entire track at the same time. The reason to start out with the main instruments first is that it can make creating a balance easier, in smaller stages. It also makes sure that there is room for all your instruments as you mix.

Two examples that show how this type of mixing can work at the extreme are quoted by Senior as  “White Flag” by Dido (Armstrong, 2009) and “Umbrella” by Rihanna (Rihanna, 2009). These two tracks both pick out the main instruments (which includes voice) and then remove frequencies from other instruments to keep room for the main instruments. In the case of “White Flag” Senor writes, “the acoustic guitars are pretty much reduced to a sprinkling of rhythmic pick noise,” and for “Umbrella”, the synths have had so much taken away that they are almost “illusions” (ibid. p.136).

The benefits of working to create balance this way is that we are not going to over-process the original recordings. And for mixing as the main aim is to resolve instrumentation conflicts, this approach will lead to clearer, cleaner, and more balanced mixes. 

References:

Armstrong, D. (2009) Dido – White Flag (official video), YouTube. Dido. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-fWDrZSiZs (Accessed: March 30, 2023). 

Rihanna (2009) Rihanna – Umbrella (orange version) (Official Music Video) ft. Jay-Z, YouTube. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvBfHwUxHIk (Accessed: March 30, 2023). 

Senior, M. (2019) “Chapter 8: Building the Raw Balance,” in Mixing secrets for the small studio. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 133–139. 

Tom Lord-Alge has been working in the recording industry since 1984 (Discogs, 2023). And was his older brother’s (Chris Lord-Alge) assistant at Unique Recording in New York (Tingen, 2000). His first major project was with Steve Winwood, “Back in the Highlife” (Winwood, 1986). This would be the first of his three Grammy wins (Linear Management, 2023).

He has mixed for a lot of artists including P!nk, Blink 182, Wheezer, The Rolling Stones, Ellie Goulding, Crash Test Dummies, and Marilyn Manson, and Korn, to name a few. 

Tom has a similar workflow to his brother Chris Lord-Alge Tom generally works with hybrid setup, preferring to use an SSL console and analog outboard gear along with digital multitrack recorders (Tingen, 2000). Tom has a few signature techniques including utilising extreme compression, and to this end, has a collection of around 40 outboard compressors to help with mixing (ibid.). The work does not begin with the technology but with a talk with the client, from there he looks at the whole picture, not just individual stems. His main goal is being “really concerned with the artist’s integrity and vision and don’t want to put my own stamp on it.” (ibid.). 

Interestingly he places the instruments that he wants the most control over in the centre of the console, “I want the instruments that are most important to be in easy reach, near the centre of the console. The faders for channels 17-24 are close to my left and 25-32 are close to my right. Tambourines can live on channel 1. I don’t want to have to move over there all the time” (Tingen, 2000). This is something that I have done while in the studios, so I am not rolling back and forth to make small adjustments. In that way he is mindful of being efficient during the process. 

References

Discogs (2023) Tom Lord-Alge, Discogs. Available at: https://www.discogs.com/artist/232766?sort=year%2Cdesc&limit=25&page=69 (Accessed: March 29, 2023). 

Linear Management (2023) Tom Lord-Alge, Linear management. Linear Management. Available at: https://linearmanagement.com/index.php/tom-lord-alge/ (Accessed: March 30, 2023). 

Tingen, P. (2000) Tom Lord-Alge: From Manson To Hanson, Tom Lord-Alge: From Manson to Hanson. Sound on Sound. Available at: https://www.soundonsound.com/people/tom-lord-alge-mix-engineer (Accessed: March 29, 2023). 

Tingen, P. (2015) Inside Track: Tom Lord-Alge, Inside track: Tom Lord-Alge. Available at: https://www.soundonsound.com/people/inside-track-tom-lord-alge (Accessed: March 30, 2023). 

Winwood, S. (1986) Back in the highlife [vinyl recording]. New York, NY: Island Records. 

Gullfoss is an intelligent EQ plugin that dynamically changes the EQ up to 100 times a second to “increase the perception of clarity, space and dimension” in recorded content (Tavaglione, 2018). It does not do this with AI, neural networks, machine learning, psychoacoustics, or DSP techniques. It does it using a proprietary “computational auditory perception technology” (Soundtheory, 2018).

It is different to the AI assisted mixing used by companies like iZotope in that it does not use neural networks or machine learning to produce the output (Tavaglione, 2018). This helps Gullfoss with its ability to do the processing in real-time. Machine learning on the other hand needs to process the data and then act accordingly. This takes time to go through the dataset and the model for it to work (ibid.). 

So, what does that mean in practice? It allows producers the ability to enhance recordings in real-time to sound better. And it works. You can apply Gullfoss to individual tracks, the whole mix, or anything in-between. With five simple controls, even when applied to the mix bus, the plugin can create separation between instruments and create a clarity that was not there before. The controls are: Recover, Tame, Bias, Brighten, and Boost.  

Recover and Tame are used to reveal masked signals to improve clarity, detail, and space in the mix. Recover brings up elements that have been masked by more dominant elements, while Tame brings down elements that are masking less dominant elements. Both Recover and Tame utilise both boosts and cuts in frequency but in different ways to preserve dynamics and loudness.

Bias and Brightness allows producers to control how Recover and Tame are applied to the signal. A positive Bias value allows Recover to affect a wider range of frequencies, while a negative Bias value allows Tame to control a wider range of frequencies. Brightness is the parameter that lets Gullfoss know if it should prefer unmasking higher or lower frequencies. 

The final control is Boost. It simulates the change in frequency balance based on human perception of volume. This is different to just turning up the volume of a track. As human hearing and perception of volume is not linear across frequency – I’m looking at you Fletcher Munson Curve – (Stewart, 2022) turning this up with turn up bass frequencies while turning down mid frequencies. 

References

Soundtheory (2018) Reveal your sound, Soundtheory. Available at: https://www.soundtheory.com/about (Accessed: March 22, 2023). 

Stewart, I. (2022) What is the fletcher munson curve? using equal loudness curves in mixing and mastering, iZotope. iZotope, Inc. Available at: https://www.izotope.com/en/learn/what-is-fletcher-munson-curve-equal-loudness-curves.html (Accessed: March 22, 2023). 

Tavaglione, R. (2018) Gullfoss inventor andreas tell tells all!, Mixonline. Available at: https://www.mixonline.com/blog/gullfoss-inventor-andreas-tell-tells-all (Accessed: March 22, 2023). 

White, P. (2023) Soundtheory Gullfoss. Available at: https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/soundtheory-gullfoss (Accessed: March 22, 2023). 

For me it is hard to believe that surround sound has been around for over 80 years. 

The first commercially released multi-channel sound was on the Disney film Fantasia in 1941 (Robjohns, 2001). This used a proprietary system, Fantasound, which enveloped the audience in an immersive soundscape and saw 10 different speaker configurations created (The Take, 2020) to work acoustically within the various theatres. Sound was produced by a combination of left, right, centre, and two rear left and right channels (Kef, 2021), using 54 speakers, and a complicated dual reel setup for the sound of the rear channels. 

Commercially the film was a failure due to the production costs of installing the system (The Take, 2020) and the costs associated with recording, and rerecording, the music. Of note, the film also was one of the first to utilise a click track, and pioneered many recording techniques (Robjohns, 2001). However, the concept of commercial immersive multi-channel audio was born.

For consumers, we would have to wait until the 1970s until we saw technology that would support multi-channel audio for the home. 

In the 1970s quadraphonic sound was introduced to consumers. While most hardware manufacturers adopted a set of two sets of stereo speakers for both front and back, incompatible formats meant that there was not wide adoption of quad systems by consumers (Robjohns, 2001). In 1976 Dolby Laboratories released an analog surround sound system for movie theatres (Kef 2021).

The 1980s saw an acceleration in technology that started to make the idea of multi-channel for the home a reality. In the 1982 Dolby Labs introduced “Dolby Surround” (Kef, 2021). In 1983 Pioneer launched the Laserdisc. This format allowed Dolby to introduce AC-3, “Dolby Digital” (ibid.) and with it the first time consumers saw “5.1” as there was a separate channel, LFE (Low Frequency Effects), for a subwoofer (ibid.). 

In 1999 Dolby released a 6.1 channel format called “Dolby Digital EX”, which did not see commercial success. However, with the release of 7.1, “Dolby Digital” in 2010, it paves the way for the 2012 release of the first Dolby Atmos-encoded film, “Brave” (Andrews et al., 2012). 

Dolby Atmos can be set up using existing 2.1, 3.1, 5.1, 7.1 and 9.1 installations. Using two overhead speakers, for example: 7.1.2 or using four ceiling speakers, for example: 7.1.4. Going all the way to a 9.1.2 system which has two additional front speakers for a wider stereo field (Dolby, 2020).

References

Andrews, M. et al. (2012) Brave. United States: Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures. 

Dolby (2020) Dolby Atmos speaker setup, Dolby. Available at: https://www.dolby.com/about/support/guide/dolby-atmos-speaker-setup/ (Accessed: March 22, 2023). 

Kef (2021) A brief history of surround sound, KEF US. Available at: https://us.kef.com/blogs/news/a-brief-history-of-surround-sound (Accessed: March 22, 2023). 

Robjohns, H. (2001) Surround Sound Explained: Part 1, Surround sound explained: Part 1. Available at: https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/surround-sound-explained-part-1 (Accessed: March 22, 2023). 

The Take (2020) What is Fantasound, and why was it created for “Fantasia”?: Read: The take, What Is Fantasound, and Why Was It Created for “Fantasia”? | Read | The Take. Available at: https://the-take.com/read/what-is-fantasound-and-why-was-it-created-for-afantasiaa (Accessed: March 22, 2023). 

Since the adoption of the CD as a music format in the 1980s the volume of music has been increasing steadily over time. To the point that in some master’s dynamics have been sacrificed to the gods of loud. This has been named, ‘The Loudness Wars’ (Robjohns, 2014).

So, I decided to look for the loudest record that has been released. Or at least, the record that has been most affected by the Loudness Wars.

The prize goes to “Death Magnetic” by Metallica (Hetfield et al. 2008). What made this album interesting was that the album was so over compressed that Metallica almost 13,000 fans went to the trouble to sign a petition to try and get the band to remaster the album (Michaels, 2008). 

One of the main reasons that fans were up in arms was the release of some of the songs in Guitar Hero 3. As the game developers are likely sent specifications for loudness there is a distinct difference in levels between the retail CD album release and the GH3 release. These can be seen in the YouTube video linked here(Metalfan7577, 2008). The difference in level is stark. The signal is so compressed that there is a complete loss of dynamics. 

However, streaming could signify the end of the Loudness Wars. How? Well most, if not all, streaming platforms normalise volume. For quieter tracks, it brings the volume up. For louder masters, it brings the levels down. To check out how this works if you right click on a YouTube video and go to the menu that says “Stats for nerds” you will be presented with a small window that shows how much normalisation has taken place to keep the relative volumes consistent across videos.

Example:

From the “Death Magnetic” example above:

This video wasn’t normalised by YouTube. This is most likely to be due to the relative input volumes that the user decided to record both sources at. Also note that YouTube does not normalise upwards. It only normalises volume over the threshold.

And, an example from “Ocean Eyes” by Billie Eilish (2016):

This shows that the original sound of Ocean Eyes was normalised quite a lot, in this case 6.1dB. Normalising down by 6dB would have the apparent effect to a listener of halving the volume.

Doing a little research, I found that Tidal, Amazon Music and YouTube are now using the same method and reference level of -14 LUFS (Shepherd, 2019).

References:

Eilish, B. (2016) Billie Eilish – Ocean Eyes (official music video), YouTube. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viimfQi_pUw (Accessed: March 13, 2023). 

Metalfan7577 (2008) Death magnetic retail vs guitar hero 3 part 2, YouTube. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zajyekxC9AM (Accessed: March 13, 2023). 

Metallica (2008) Death magnetic [CD]. Universal international music BV. 

Michaels, S. (2008) Metallica’s death magnetic ‘loudness war’ continues, The Guardian. Guardian News and Media. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2008/oct/01/metallica.popandrock (Accessed: March 13, 2023). 

Robjohns, H. (2014) The End Of The Loudness War?, The end of the Loudness War? Available at: https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/end-loudness-war (Accessed: March 13, 2023). 

Senior, M. (2019) “Chapter 19: Master-Buss Processing, Automation, and Endgame,” in Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio. Oxon, UK: Routledge, pp. 337–339. 

Shepherd, I. (2019) YouTube changes loudness reference to -14 LUFS, MeterPlugs. Available at: https://www.meterplugs.com/blog/2019/09/18/youtube-changes-loudness-reference-to-14-lufs.html (Accessed: March 13, 2023). 

The first user-adjustable EQ was created in the 1930s by John Volkmann while he was at RCA (Szikla, 2022). He created it to get better sound for motion picture theatres. It allowed movie theatres to selectively boost or cut frequencies to make them movies played sound better.

At around the same time Arthur Davis from the Cinema Engineering Company (CEC) created the first Graphic Equalizer, the 7080 (Szikla, 2022). This device had six bands (63Hz, 160Hz, 400Hz, 1kHz, 2.5kHz, and 6.3kHz) with +/- 8dB for each band. 

Arthur then left CEC and took a job with Altec where he designed the 9062A seven band equaliser (50Hz, 130Hz, 320Hz, 800Hz, 2kHz, 5kHz, and 12.5kHz). This is a completely passive device that remained a benchmark until the 1970s. And just look at those faders…

The biggest leap in EQ was the parametric EQ. In 1971 Daniel Flickinger invented a ‘Sweepable EQ’ which allowed a user to arbitrarily select a frequency and gain for up to three bands (Parametric Equalizer explained, 2022). However, it was in 1972 that George Massenburg and Burgess Macneal created the idea for a tuneable EQ. George wrote a paper presented to AES (Massenberg, G. 1972) that had adjustable bandwidth for each of the frequency bands. Massenburg called the a ‘Parametric Equalizer’. George’s company GML still sells them under this brand name today.

References:

Massenberg, G. (1972) AES convention papers forum, AES Convention Papers Forum ” Parametric Equalization. Available at: https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/conventions/?elib=16171 (Accessed: March 11, 2023

Parametric Equalizer explained (2022) SoundBridge. SoundBridge. Available at: https://soundbridge.io/parametric-equalizer-2/ (Accessed: March 11, 2023). 

Szikla, A. (2022) View from the bench: Tracing the EQ path, AudioTechnology. AudioTechnology. Available at: https://www.audiotechnology.com/tutorials/view-from-the-bench-tracing-the-eq-path (Accessed: March 11, 2023). 

For this week we have been asked to visually represent a mix of a track. For this I have chosen “Watchin’” by the Freemasons (Freemasons, 2021). It is a track that I have listened to for many years and danced to on more than one occasion. The track was released in 2006, though the YouTube clip that I found was uploaded in 2021. 

After reading through “Chapter 2: Visual Representations of ‘Imaging’” from “The art of mixing” (Gibson, 2019) I will create a visual of the mix elements I can hear on the track and see if I can listen closely enough to create a good image.

In this instance I am going to start with the most prominent things I can hear. The vocals and the bass/kick. The kick sounds like a 909 and is quite punchy. I can hear it sitting around 40-100Hz. The bass has a little more going on with the attack and is sitting a higher in the mix. The vocals have quite a lot of frequencies in them and while there is some space for the piano and vocals to sit, they tend to occupy some of the same frequency range. The spiccato strings and hi-hats fill in a lot of the higher frequencies. In terms of panning, there is not a whole lot going on. All of this adds up to a dense mix with a lot of energy. 

I can also say that this was a great exercise and helped a lot with critical listening.

References:

Freemasons (2021) Watchin’ (feat. Amanda Wilson), YouTube. Freemasons. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6hxLLdc0Ww (Accessed: March 11, 2023). 

Gibson, D. (2019) “Chapter 2: Visual Representations of ‘Imaging,’” in The art of mixing: A visual guide to recording, engineering, and production. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 38–62.