EYAL LEVI & JOHN MACIEL: Mixing Dynamic Metal, Common Drum Pitfalls, and The Importance of Vision

Speaker 1 (00:00):

Welcome to the Unstoppable Recording Machine Podcast brought to you by Sonar Works. Sonar Works is on a mission to ensure everybody hears music the way it was meant to be across all devices. Visit Sonar works.com for more info and now your host Eyal Levi.

Speaker 2 (00:20):

Welcome to the URM podcast. I am Eyal Levi and I just want to tell you that this show is brought to you by URM Academy, the world's best education for rock and metal producers. Every month on Nail the Mix, we bring you one of the world's best producers to mix a song from scratch, from artists like Lama God, Ms. Suga, periphery The Day To Remember. Bring me the Horizon, opec many, many more, and we give you the raw multitrack so you can mix along. You also get access to Mix Lab, our collection of bite-sized mixing tutorials and Portfolio Builder, which are pro quality multi-tracks that are cleared for use in your portfolio. You can find out [email protected]. Before we get into the show, I want to tell you about a brand new product we just launched the Complete Beginner's Guide to Recording Rock and Metal.

(01:06):

It's a short two hour course hosted by Ryan Fluff Bruce, where he walks you through every single step of the process for recording a complete song from scratch in a simple home studio. If you've been thinking about getting into recording but you weren't sure where to start, this is for you. It gives you a list of exactly which gear that we suggest you get, shows you how to set it all up, then gives you a step-by-step guide to record a guitar, bass and vocals and programming midi drums, everything you need to record an awesome high quality demo with no more than a few hundred dollars worth of gear and just to make sure you have absolutely everything you need. The course includes copies of Tone Forge Menace and Gain Reduction by Joey Surg tones and a virtual drum plugin from Drum Forge that's over $200 in software included with the course.

(01:56):

So it's pretty much a no-brainer. If that sounds cool to you, you can get instant access to the course and all the included [email protected]. And one last thing I want to tell you about, and this is really cool. I want to tell you about a cool new partnership we've got with Empire Ears. They make a quality in ear monitor that lets you bring your studio with you anywhere seriously. You can mix with these, and I know it sounds crazy for me to say, but it is absolutely true. If you're at all mobile with your audio or you are in a situation where volume is a problem like you mix out of an apartment, you may want to check these out and here's how it works. Basically, URM users are getting hooked up with an exclusive discount and personalized support. And think about it like this, how sick is it to be able to take your reference with you Every single place you go with Empire Studio Response Monitor, you can have a flat response sound you can trust every single place you go.

(03:04):

So for more info, just reach out to [email protected] for details. That's D-Y-L-A-N at e mp I-R-E-A-R s.com. Alright, here it goes. I will shut up now. Welcome back to yet another edition of Mix Crit Monday. This one is going to feature URM students submitted mixes of Rivers of Niles, where owls know my name and with me is co-host John Maciel. Hello John. What's up? Just hanging out listening to these mixes, getting ready for this. This is an interesting one, don't you think? This song goes through so many things and it's so many different types of feels and it's got elements that you just don't hear in metal at all, ever. So I think that it threw a lot of people for a loop.

Speaker 3 (04:05):

Oh yeah, this one was a fun one because of the dynamics in how you just said. It moves around and I think as a mixer this song is what I would call a playground mix in terms of once you have the foundation set, it's really about letting the parts move in and out of one another and one really cool cohesive vision, almost like old school mixes, like the ones we grew up listening to. So this is a awesome track and plus dude saxophone, you know what I'm saying? That's all you need and you have a binger.

Speaker 2 (04:36):

I'm not sure how I feel about saxophone, but I'll let it slide this one time. Yeah, well these six times really, because we've got six mixes on deck. I don't know I can handle it in this song, but it's probably in my top five most hated instruments.

Speaker 3 (04:56):

Really?

Speaker 2 (04:57):

Yeah, just makes me think of elevator music. But that's not to say that it sounds like elevator music in this song. It's just that instrument not my favorite, but hey, the George Michael Song, that one's great. Sack. Sounds good in this one. It's been done. It's happened. It is possible.

Speaker 3 (05:16):

I think your problem is you haven't been to enough blues clubs. I think that's what it's

Speaker 2 (05:20):

Fuck that. I'm not going to go to any. Alright, let's, let's not go down this path because it's going to get real dark and then you'll find the light in the blues. No, I don't want to talk about it. Yeah, I want to leave my opinion on blues out of this. So let's get to crit mixes. So up first is we're owls Know my name mixed by URM subscriber Richard Mann.

Speaker 4 (06:12):

I lost those. We just relax our

Speaker 2 (07:27):

Alright. That was Richard Herman's mix and I think the intro sounds all right, meaning the buildup, but the snare tone bugs me a little and I was originally not going to say anything, but then I heard it with the heavy parts and it sticks out so weird and the Tom stick out so weird that I realized that original thing that was bugging me about the snare is just weird. It wasn't artistic, it was weird, and you can really tell as soon as the heavy stuff is about to come in that the drums sound kind of weird because the drummer starts playing fills. The Toms come in really for the first time and it's just like, whoa, what's going on here? If you listen to Carson and Grant's mix, they're nice and warm and somewhat dark. They sound pretty big and smooth, if you can call it that.

(08:21):

And when it transitions into the heavy part, it sounds very natural. I don't mean natural like no samples. I mean it's a natural sounding transition. This is just really, really odd sounding and the opposite of Carson and Grants. There's a real weird high end all over the drums. I think overall this mix could stand to be way darker. Vocals wise, they actually sound okay, but I think the harmony balances are a little weird. The wrong voices are too loud, but still they sound pretty good At times, I feel like the Kick and Toms are not glued to the mix. They just stick out too much. But overall, I will say that I do think this mix is actually pretty good. It's most definitely not a redo. I think this is just a tweak at some and you're good to go. What do you think

Speaker 3 (09:12):

Kind of the opposite. The snare thing for sure stuck out to me. It's like the wiry snares underneath were boosted and then blended into the original snare, so you get this weird top end wiry white noise sound. I feel like dudes when they can't hear the snare, they go and they boost seven K and until they're like, oh yeah, that's where the top ends at. But really it's like all you're doing is adding all this extra information that just thins it out actually in the mix. It doesn't make it sound any heavier or more dynamic and in a mix like this, you need the scenario to kind of have a pretty good balance foundation to make it sound even and cohesive throughout all the parts. And that was not the case with this snare. The kick to me also was super loud. It's almost like the fundamental was boosted and then a high pass filter was brought so close that you get that weird resonant EQ slope or maybe the way he cut created that effect and it's just like there's this really woofy low end sound and yeah, with the Toms, it just sounded, the drums in general just sounded really weird to me in this mix.

(10:18):

I felt like the bass was really quiet. I couldn't hear the fundamentals, but I could definitely hear the movement from the bass compression symbols were glassy. Overall for me, this mix had no depth, no impact dynamics, all the stuff that makes this original song, the original mix so sick was missing in this whole mix. It was almost like a static mix that was printed and the sax was super dry. For me, I would say this is kind of not a complete redo, but just kind of step back and see what your drums are doing and maybe adding, cleaning out the harshness and then readjusting the mids and just going for a more cohesive sound could probably change a lot of the issues that we're hearing right now.

Speaker 2 (11:06):

That's exactly what I was getting at. I don't think he needs to start from scratch. I think he just needs to approach those issues. I don't think it's so bad that it's worth the redo. I think that that kick get that kick under control. Don't make it sound louder than the mix. That alone will solve so many problems. Even if the EQ isn't great on it, it's not terrible, terrible, but the volume is just not cool. I don't know, I just can't consider this a redo because when we deal with a redo, it's extremely worse than this. I think.

Speaker 3 (11:44):

Yeah, the guitars sounded fine to me. Those didn't bother me. There was stuff in there that's definitely workable. It's just like if you don't have the vision of what you're trying to do with the mix, it's like you get this static thing, which is what's happening. Yeah, just get the drums out of control, dude.

Speaker 2 (12:01):

At least the vision thing, that's going to be coming up a lot because I feel like that's the main thing people are missing and you have to have it when you go after a song like this. You absolutely have to have it. So next up is mixed by Mr. Ben Andre.

(14:00):

That was Rivers of Niles were owls know my name mixed by URM student Ben Andreza and God, this mix is loud. The intro sounds pretty good though, but again, just like the first mix we heard that snare just sounds kind of weird. I'm hearing too much weird overtone when it gets hit or I'm, yeah, so I'm hearing that weird overtones. It's like, or it's all bottom snare on the fills. It's like no top mic, all snares all the time. And then the Toms man, the Toms are way too loud at around 1 0 5, way too loud. You know how we said in the previous mix that the kicks were too loud? Well, these Toms are twice as loud as those kicks and it all kind of makes sense when it gets heavy. However, the snare still just sticks out weird, like a weird honk hit. There's no power in the kicks.

(14:58):

I can hear the low end, but there's no presence to it. And also straight up the kicks are just quiet. The drums, the mix, the vocals, everything, they're just too bright and I hear weird squeaky shit all over it. I don't know where that squeaky shit is coming from, but it almost sounds like a kick drum pedal. You know what I'm talking about, the squeak that a kick drum pedal makes if you don't oil them enough. I'm hearing that sound strangely all over the mix and I couldn't identify what it was, so I'm just going to say something is over compressed in there and making this weird squeak toy happen. Symbols sound swirly and way too loud. The balances are just kind of weird on this one as well as the choice of tone Blands, I'd redo this one.

Speaker 3 (15:52):

Yeah, I was just going to say this one is a definite redo. A hundred percent. There's so much weirdness happening. I almost am curious if this is one of those listening environments or headphones type of situation. Just too many things in here to kind of wonder how was this not noticed? How did he miss it? Yeah, just start over. The only thing that I did in this mix was the sax.

Speaker 2 (16:18):

Well, let me say that back when I used to have a really terrible listening environment, I would also mix Toms like that. I ended up getting yelled at by mastering engineers, but back when I had my first studio with improper base trapping, I would be mixing in a null spot and so I would jack the floor tom to where I thought it sounded great. You'd get it in a car and it would just be destructive of earth. It could be a situation like that where just wherever he's sitting, it just makes no sense.

Speaker 3 (16:54):

Yeah, I want to piggyback on that for a second because it's kind of something that I don't know if people have noticed, but when you do that kind of treatment in the Toms and you're going to boost it, it's a clear indication to me, and it probably was for you too, Al, is the issue really lies in how you're treating your overhead in rooms because those are part of where the Tom sound comes to life as well. So if you're not treating those appropriately with your Toms, you end up with super loud Toms that just are, as you call 'em, drums in space. They're totally not a part of the kit, they're not cohesive. It's really important to listen to your overheads and take what you can from those as well to add to the painting of the drums and create a more cohesive drum sound with the kick and the snare also. Yeah,

Speaker 2 (17:40):

Totally. This sounds like close mics very loud.

Speaker 3 (17:44):

100%.

Speaker 2 (17:45):

Alright, next up is a mix by Mr. Benjamin Moore.

(19:38):

That was the Rivers of Nile mixed by Benjamin Moore. And lemme just say this intro is too bright and the snare is way too loud. It sounds like really hard hitting loud snare on what's supposed to be a far more subdued part. And back to what we were saying about vision, you got to have vision for this kind of stuff. You cannot approach an intro section like this. It's a heavy part and the fills are just kind of ridiculous in terms of velocities. You're not matching the dynamics of the song with your velocities when the heavy part comes in, the whole thing just becomes a mess. The low end is either there or all over. The place goes in and out of coherence and then sometimes it's just overwhelming. It's hard to describe, but the rhythm guitars are way too loud. Wow. Way too loud on the rhythm guitars at times.

(20:35):

It's just like, so you know how sometimes people call heavy guitars like a wall of guitars or something? This feels more like a cloud of guitars, like you're in a fog of guitar, it's all distorted guitar all around you and you can barely see the drum set and that fog of heavy guitars all over everything. I'm trying to visualize what it is that I'm hearing, but interestingly enough, just like those rhythm guitars that are too loud, the symbols are way too loud. That makes me think that this has something to do with the mastering chain because typically when stuff gets mastered like crazy wrong, the guitars and the symbols, the side information tends to get too loud. So that's my little clue. There's zero power in the kicks or base and the high hat is like a weapon that's got its target set on my ear the entire mix and it's just blasting. I'd redo this one. That

Speaker 3 (21:38):

Was a great analogy. I mean, I don't know how else to say it. Hi is targeted towards my ear. I've never heard that one, so that was great. It's a high powered weapon.

Speaker 2 (21:48):

What do you think though?

Speaker 3 (21:50):

Yeah, super gnarly. The guitars sounded really, I don't know what that sound was too. I was really trying to figure it out. It's almost like a weird, it's a thin sound guitar, but as you said, like a cloud blanket of noisy, weird harmonics, whatever's going on, and it's almost, I feel like he's the guitars for some weird clarity, but the problem that lies is that he's probably scooped out some of the fundamental mids of the harmonics of the guitar and then the bass isn't in check at all. So you start going down this rabbit hole and really you're boosting, you're creating these weird resonances because of all the dips and weird EQ moves. Then you throw a mastering chain that sounds like that's what's happening on here and everything falls apart. There's no coming back from that. We've done quite a few of these and I feel comfortable in saying that Some of the listeners of the podcast, if you're not a hundred percent comfortable with your mixes in general, turn off the mastering chain and really just learn to mix with nothing on there and develop your ears to hear masking frequencies and make spaces.

(23:00):

I've heard so many mixes ruined by a mastering chain. When I hear the Unmastered version, it's 10 times better always, and it's because you don't know what EQ moves you're making on the mastering level yet because you haven't a hundred percent honed in the mixing stage. So just bypass that and really learn to hone in that skill. And the drums sounded to me really thin. They were kind of scooped. There was no depth, no punch symbols were doing weird stuff. This is probably another redo for me to be honest. There's just too much weird stuff.

Speaker 2 (23:30):

Absolutely. Absolutely a redo.

Speaker 3 (23:32):

Yeah. Yeah. That's all the notes I got on this one.

Speaker 2 (23:35):

I mean really the only note is redo, but I think we've said enough about it. I mean, thank you for submitting it. You're submitting it for crits, that's the crit. And I'm wondering also, lemme just say, I'm wondering if this is a product of the whole top down mixing thing, which I think is a perfectly valid way to mix, but it's one of those things that a lot of beginners tend to use because it seems like a shortcut, but it's actually something that only advanced people should do

Speaker 3 (24:11):

100%

Speaker 2 (24:12):

Because you've got to really, really understand balances in EQ almost like in a finished product kind of way in order to get it right. If you go top down, when you see a top down expert, first of all, they probably didn't start doing top-down mixes and they're only able to do top-down mixes because their vision of what the end product is supposed to be is so good that they can start with the end chain already there. Most of you are not at that point yet, and if you watch nail the mix, you'll notice that the dudes who mix into a mastering chain, most of them with very few exceptions, don't start with the mastering chain. They get a basic mix and then they add it. So keep that in mind

Speaker 3 (24:57):

100%. They know what they're doing because they've done enough mixes, they've heard end products and they've made adjustments through 10 to 15 years of their career. It's taken 'em that long to get to that point. So starting off and doing it absolutely wrong move in my opinion.

Speaker 2 (25:13):

Totally. Hey everybody, if you're enjoying this podcast and you should know that, brought to you by URM Academy URM Academy's mission is to create the next generation of audio professionals by giving them the inspiration information to hone their craft and build a career doing what they love. You've probably heard me talk about Nail the mix before and if you're remember, you already know how amazing it is at the beginning of the month. Now the mix members get the raw multitracks to a new song by artists like Lama God, Opeth, Shuga, bring Me the Horizon Gaira asking Alexandria Machine Head and Papa Roach among many, many others. Then at the end of the month, the producer who mixed it comes on and does a live streaming walkthrough of exactly how they mix the song of the album and takes your questions live on the air. You'll also get access to Mix Lab, our collection of dozens of bite-sized mixing tutorials that cover all the basics and Portfolio Builder, which is a library of pro quality multi-tracks cleared for use of your portfolio.

(26:16):

So your career will never again be held back by the quality of your source material. And for those who really, really want to step up their game, we have another membership tier called URM Enhanced, which includes everything I already told you about and access to our massive library of fast tracks, which are deep, super detailed courses on intermediate and advanced topics like gain, staging, mastering loan and so forth. It's over 50 hours of content. And man, let me tell you, this stuff is just insanely detailed. Enhanced members also get access to one-on-one office hours sessions with us and Mix Rescue, which is where we open up one of your mixes on a live video stream, fix it up and talk you through exactly what we're doing at every step. If any of that sounds interesting to you, if you're ready to level up your mixing skills and your audio career, head over to M Academy slash enhanced to find out more. Next mix. This one is by Blake Bun

Speaker 4 (28:02):

And

Speaker 2 (28:50):

Alright, that was Blake Bun's, rivers of Nile Mix and man, that low end is out of control. Holy mastering chain. That intro is so big compared to the band coming in that it's just weird. I mean that buildup sounds massive and then the band is just tiny, not good when that happens. And this is pushed way too hard, way too hard. The soft part is supposed to be soft, but the drums are strangely bright and they're mixed, kind of like death metal drums. It doesn't sound like a soft bar, but they sound like very high pitched high Andy super metal drums on the soft bar. Same thing as many of these other mixes takes place when the heavy stuff comes in, which is that these weird drums that are totally out of place on the soft part are even more out of place on the heavy part.

(29:51):

Strangely enough, you'd think that if they're mixing a soft part with heavy ass drums, it would be cool once the heavy part comes in, but nope, it just sounds weirder and the drums are just too loud. The snare sticks out Strangely, the bass and guitar are not melding. I can hear the bass fine, but it's not providing a very good cohesive glued bottom for the mix and just stands out as its own instrument and the bass needs to do both. It needs to stand out as well as provide that bottom. And the sax pierces my ears, EQ it. What do you think,

Speaker 3 (30:27):

Dude? The distorting sound that's happening through the entire mix is so gnarly. I haven't heard something like that in a minute, to be honest. It's like the base is so out of control that every time it hits the mix just distorts and in the mid, especially the distortion is really bad. Whatever mastering chain's going on needs to be tamed and dialed back a lot significantly, in my opinion. Yeah,

Speaker 2 (30:53):

Slow that roll.

Speaker 3 (30:54):

Yeah, this is one of those cases I just talked about is cool. Those jets where the mastering chain is ruining probably what is really a good mix to start with, but the moment you start adding all these other things, it's distorting. It's ruining the potential in everything. Yeah, man. For me it would be turn off the mastering chain and just work with the mix and then add just a limiter to see how it's doing. If there's a mastering chain on here, it's ruining the mix for me. Oh, there is a mastering chain on it, I guarantee you. Yeah, it's not like, I almost want to say doover, but I feel it's like just take off the mastering chain and see how that sounds. The kick, the snare almost sounded the same to me also and they were super in my face the whole time. And then the Toms, when the fills came in just were so tubby. I like to call 'em water toms to where it's, I always think of a music video when the drummer hits the Tom's in the rain or something like that and there's just no sound. It's just like block, block type sound going on. But yeah, there's just weirdness all over. This one for me, speaking

Speaker 2 (32:04):

Of those music videos are fucking hilarious because that is what drums sound like when they're having water poured on

Speaker 3 (32:15):

Them. Yeah, it's a super rock. But yeah, dude, audio engineers need to do away with water. Toms. I agree. Alright,

Speaker 2 (32:23):

This next mix is by Dave Power.

(34:00):

Alright, that was by Dave Power. I think that the reverse effects on the buildup are at the wrong level compared to the drums. They just need to be balanced. But overall, while I don't think that this soft part is mixed quite right, I feel like it's headed in the right direction and that's a big deal because really none of the other mixes I've heard today were going in the right direction. But I need to be really, really clear that I don't think this is a very good mix, but the fact that it's headed in the right direction gives me hope. The drums are soft, they're subdued in this intro and there's ambiance all over it. And I do think that the sounds and the balances need work and the drums could be even more slightly subdued, but it's in the right direction and none of the other mixes really had any ambience or anything, which is kind of weird to me overall.

(34:52):

This sounds kind of small I think, but it sounds like artistically it's headed on the right track and that's mainly because I can tell that Dave is actually listening to the song and try to make choices that enhance the song. The execution part is what needs work and to me it just sounds like it's a case of needing to sharpen some basic mixing skills like eq, compression, time-based effects and balance. And I feel like just getting better at those things in general, we'll do more than anything else because the fact that there is an artistic vision this early before the skills are totally there, is very, very promising. So Dave, I'd like to offer you two months of URM enhanced if you're not already in it. If you are, you can have two free months of it just so that you can watch some of the fast tracks and work on your EQ compression time-based effects and balance. I do think that if the actual technical part of mixing was better, that this mix would probably be pretty great. However, it's kind of not that great because the skills just aren't there. However, kudos and points for having an artistic vision for it. What do you think?

Speaker 3 (36:14):

Yeah, I like how you said the direction. It goes back to what you were saying earlier with when you have a vision, it makes all the difference. And this is definitely one of those where he's got the feel and I really resonated with the feel even though the technical aspect wasn't there, it almost was okay because he was tuned into the song itself. It's just like, oh, if he did this tweak here, that would be better if he did this here, that would be better. And it's more so the technical thing, but the feel was there, the vision was there, and to me that was fresh. It was like cool, someone is resonating with the song. I don't mean this in a bad way when I say it, but it was almost like a producer demo mix that would be sent to the mixing engineer and then he would like, oh, this is kind of where the band or the artist is thinking or a musician demo mix.

(37:03):

Yeah, exactly. That's what it sounded like to me. It is not like to say anything bad. There are producers who can mix, but when you get mixes as a mixer, it's very normal to get stuff like this where you can hear clearly where the direction is going. There's nowhere for you to falter because you're like, oh, this needs to do this, that now my job is to take it there. I'm glad you offered him the fast tracks. I really do think that there's a lot of potential in him gaining the technical aspect. Now with all that stuff being said, the snare, reverb, ambient stuff was super distracting, especially when the snare fails happened. You can hear that room ambiance kind of come out and then there was a weird pump through the drums the entire time. I think it was maybe either the drum bus compression or a parallel bus that was moving opposite of the actual song and mix. At times bass was super quiet and low in the mix. Symbols were harsh, they sounded like glass getting hit type symbols and the vocals were quiet and this is all that technical stuff that with some more practice could be fixed and take things a lot further than where they're at now. But so far for the day, this is definitely the better one we've listened to. It's strange

Speaker 2 (38:16):

Though, I think that some listeners are going to be weirded out because it's definitely in some ways kind of the least flashy technically. Out of all these though, I do think that they're all kind of technically fucked up. This one feels like the most demo ish in a weird way, like what you said, but it just feels artistically and that to me wins every time

Speaker 3 (38:41):

100%. It serves the song and I think that's what we're picking up on and resonating with is as mixed engineers. And that's what most of the audience is wanting to do. You have to resonate and really connect with the song and what the artists and the producer want. And if you can't do that, you're not going to get the next call. And this mix is one of those where, yeah, technically not great, but man, the vibe is there. You can't deny it. It needs guidance. That's all.

Speaker 2 (39:09):

And I agree with you on the technical stuff for sure. When I said there's ambience all over it, I was mainly saying it's a good thing that there was ambience. However, the execution of the ambience was not the best, but the ambience itself was kind of, if you fix the ambience he chose, it's like he chose the right kind. Alright, moving on. This one is by J Double Rice and man, if I mispronounce your name, I'm sorry

Speaker 4 (39:52):

I

Speaker 2 (41:03):

All right. That was by J Double Rice. That intro buildup is way too quiet compared to the band. The band is so loud when it comes in and why is that happening? What's funny though is that this is in lots of ways this mix is the opposite of lots of other people's mixes. This happens again when it goes to the heavy part where the heavy part sounds smaller than the intro soft part. So alright, so you got to a really, really quiet buildup, super loud part that's supposed to be subdued and then it goes to a brutally heavy part that actually sounds smaller and softer than the soft part. I don't get it. Guitars in the heavy part also are way too loud. There's no power in the kick. And again, this is kind of the opposite of what most of the other mixers did.

(41:56):

They were mixing the soft parts like a heavy part. And Jay is mixing the heavy parts like soft parts and also the levels and the feels between the sections are just kind of weird. They don't flow together at all. It's so jerky, it gets louder, softer, louder, softer and in a really disjoint way that doesn't make any logical sense. Again, like heavy parts sounding smaller and quieter than soft parts that are dialed to 11. I would practice listening from section to section and really focus on those transitions and really, really work on balance. What do you think

Speaker 3 (42:43):

100% also, am I imagining it? I don't think I am, but when the band kicks in like full throttle, I swear the mix is distorting, but it's not like a hard distortion. It's like a subtle distortion and I feel there's a harmonic, saturated or tape emulation that's attributing to this big weird distorting sound. But I feel the biggest culprits to kind of what you're talking about with the dynamics is the kick drum sounds really boxy and there's a lot of sub resonances in the low end and then the base is also super loud, but it's not tight. The fundamental isn't compact, it's just kind of what I refer to it as the illusion of low end in your base to where your base sounds loud and huge, but really if you really listen to it, the fundamental is washy and all those low mids are eating up everything in the mix.

(43:36):

And because of how waveforms work with the kick and base, all that information when it's going up too fast, can't die down quick enough, you haven't controlled them. And that's eating up all the space on the mix bus and the mastering. And then you get this weird small, loud section, big quiet section as you said, it's like the opposite inverse effect is happening throughout all the sections of the song and then it just becomes distracting and weird. You're like, oh, the band comes in, it should sound huge in my face and it doesn't. And then you're kind of like, wait, what's going on? Why is this even happening? Trying to figure out what's going on is very difficult when you don't see what his mix looks like. Snare was really thin to me also, and it could use more punch, more low fundamental beef in there.

(44:27):

The guitar sounded super scooped and I did like the clean guitars and the reverb on the sax though was way too big and distracting. It almost felt like the sax was the largest instrument in everything that I heard so far. So maybe the sax player is the guy who mixed it, maybe the sax player mixed it. I think that's our answer and never let a sex player mix it, but those are all my notes on this one. This was another one where I felt like there was no vision for where this song was to go. There was no listening to the sections. And I feel like that with a lot of the mixes we heard today that people were going to the heavy part that was fun and mixing that part and totally disregarding the rest of the mix and the song. And that's what makes this song awesome is there's so much fun stuff and dynamics to play.

(45:22):

And for me as a growing mixer, I love that stuff. Making a cohesive mix out of something that has so many different parts. That's where the fun comes into play. When you've honed in the fundamentals and all that stuff and now you're challenged with, alright, you have this very long journey of a song, how do you make it sound enjoyable from beginning to end for the band and the producer and the listener, when you guys are mixing songs like this, even your own portfolio stuff, don't just get stuck on the heavy part. Listen to the entire song, play it back a couple times, make sure everything sounds the way it should sound and that nothing's ignored If you ignore a part of any song for that matter, it's just static songs and they're not fun and it's not cool. I agree.

Speaker 2 (46:12):

Every part should get as equal and detailed of a treatment as every other part. Those parts, those soft parts are just as important as the heavy parts. I mean they go on for well over a minute at the beginning. Obviously it's important if it goes on for over a minute in the beginning. And I guarantee you that if these mixes were, especially the ones that were messed up with the weird ass drums, if this is what was released, I guess a better version, but one where the feel of that intro is just off. It just made no sense. Listeners would not even get to the heavy part. And this is a death metal band. Their audience wants heavy parts somehow. This is also one of their biggest songs. So obviously there's something to be said for when the feel is nailed on something that's not quite what the audience is expecting.

(47:15):

Lots of times they'll still give it a shot because for some reason they like it and it feels good. But I guarantee you that if you're handed a band like this to mix and they have some out of the box stuff and you don't pay attention to the vision or develop one and you just present a really weird mix, you're going to be causing them some damage. No one's going to want to listen to it. That's my take. That said, this has been another episode of Mixed Script Monday. We do these every single month. There are no submissions for these. We choose them all at random from our private members only mixed CRI group, the Octagon on Facebook. If you want to get one of your mixes on mixed script Monday, all you need to do is go to the URM octagon and post a mix and we might pick it. So yeah, these are all picked at random. Nobody knew that they were going to get picked and hopefully they don't hate us too much. John, thanks for being with me.

Speaker 1 (48:22):

Thanks for having me. This episode of the Unstoppable Recording Machine podcast was brought to you by Sonar Works. Sonar Works is on a mission to ensure everybody hears music the way it was meant to be across all devices. Visit Sonar works.com for more info to ask us questions, make suggestions and interact, visit and.