Re: Number of Engineers
Hi Brent,
PM sent to you as well. That was a good question so I thought I would answer it in the forum as well for those it can be helpful to. Here is the forum version:
I was referring to mixing in general as opposed to being an A level engineer. Anyone can learn to mix, while their interpretation and taste is very subjective some basic concepts are not. I used the well recorded CD as a place to compare because I am sure the average person thinks that will be the best sound one can get. I was a studio engineer for almost 10 years with many album credits before I started doing live sound regularly and I can assure you it is easier to sound better on a great system live than playing a CD if you have the talent and equipment to work with for the optimization reasons I mentioned above.
With live sound you are dealing with so much more than in the studio, so it requires some different techniques and approaches. I am not sure where your skill and knowledge level is at so I will just mention a few basics and hopefully there will be something you can use there. I am planning on writing more on the forum to help where I can in the near future as well.
The name of the game with live is to not amplify anything you don't want in the mix first and foremost. The easy example is using the low cut filter on every channel but Kik drum and bass guitar unless it is something you really need low frequency extension on. A vocal microphone on a stand is picking up stage rumble, bass guitar bleed, all sorts of stage slosh in various states of phase, and all sorts of things that are not your friend. The more channels you can eliminate unwanted rumble and mud from before you amplify it the better. This is what I refer to as "cleaning up your mix" and it applies to all unwanted sounds an all channels in all frequencies. Solo up a guitar mic in the headphones during a show and listen to all the slosh from everything else that is there. Do the same with the tom mics etc. When you multiply that by 10 or 15 channels in various states of phase it is very significant. Now amplify it through the mains and you get the idea.
The other big part of cleaning up a mix that most people seem to miss is that the overall sound is coming from EVERYTHING on ALL channels combined. Something may sound great by itself but when everything else is playing the perceived tone may go completely in another direction. Also anything else coming through that channel if it is a microphone or pickup is affecting the overall sound to some degree. The real skill is making various cuts and compromises across the board to get the stellar overall sound. The first one I always state that so many people don't understand and might disagree with is a FULL 15dB or better cut centered between 400Hz and 500HZ on all of the toms. Just listen to the slosh on 1 tom mic during the show solo with and without the cut and you will understand what is going on. Again multiply that by the number of toms and imagine amplifying all that at the fader position during the show. A 3dB-5dB or more cut around 400Hz on the snare drum usually helps to clean things up a bit and emphasizes the crack and body of the drum as well. It will also help it not step on most vocals as much. Always sweep the center frequencies I mentioned up and down a tiny bit to find what sounds the best when you can.
-Eric
There is a lot of really good basics here and I truely believe that a great mix is just the basics repeated over and over again. I have raised some ire before but I also believe that mixing (especially in a live setting with a one off band where you have no input into their production or arrangement) is a technical skill rather than an artistic skill that can be learned by anyone with decent ears who is willing to learn then apply those basics.
So I figured I would add on some of my basics.
1. A great mix starts with a well tuned system. You cannot use use eq to help shape a mix if you are using it to fight feedback. If all the eq power is used to fight feedback, the mix is going to be whatever is left over regardless of how it sounds. Fix the feedback at the source with mic choice and mic placement. If you are stuck trying to fix it with eq you are going to have to make a choice whether to address it at the system level (whether monitor or FOH) or at the channel level. Both have limitations and compromises.
2. Practice subtractive eq. Take out what you don't want. The better a band is at arranging their material, the less you will have to cut because the band will already have made space in the mix for each instrument. If they haven't, don't be afraid to cut a lot. As an alternative to Eric's tom example, I like to use a bluegrass example. Each of the typical bluegrass instrument overlaps significantly in the frequency range that gives their voice. When close micing the instruments, the buildup can make it difficult to hear solo parts without a significant volume change, which I hate and think is bad mixing. So instead, you can make space by subtractive eq to give each instrument its own place in that frequency range. Use 3-6 cuts from roughly 1000 hz - 3000 hz, placing the cut for the instrument you want to be lowest in the mix highest in the range. I.E. cut the lows from the mandolin, cut the highs from the guitar/dobro. I tend to place the banjo dead in the center. But to go back to #1 mic choice helps. I was at a festival with split sets with a band that had a Kel Mic endorsement. After our second set the system tech told me I had the best sounding banjo of the entire festival up to that point. I pointed to a channel strip where every eq was straight up. Usually the best solution is to put a good sounding mic on a good sounding source and let it rip.
3. Ignore #2 as needed. Subtractive eq is nice but if a boost is what makes it works, go for it. There are several of my mics that I use on a regular basis that get a specific boost as part of the profile the way I use them. Did I mention before if you are not constantly chasing feedback problems it is wonderful to actually be able to use your channel tools to shape the sound.
4. I have mentioned several times I like to use SMAART's spectrograph on my cue bus when I mix. You can certainly sweep frequencies when listening for things that overlap or are building up the mud, but I can also cue it and actually see what each channel is contributing. The problem with mud is you may not be aware of which channels are causing the problem, and trial and error with a 20 channel band takes valuable show time. The visual reinforcement of the spectrograph is amazing to me.
5. The thought that making each instrument sound great on its own but that may not work in a complete mix is important. Everything we hear, we hear in a particular context. This is the same reason I discourage bands from the one channel at a time method for setting levels in monitors. Go ahead and play something. You can survive a verse or two without yopur monitors being perfect. Listen in the context of the whole band playing because that is how you will be listening during the set. The same holds true for FOH, listen to your mix including both monitors and backline volume. Perhaps what the mix needs is for you to reinforce only part of what the instrument sound is. It is fairly common for me in small shows to only reinforce part of the bass' range of frequencies because I think bassists have a hard time hearing how their amp sounds in different spaces. So I basically let them do what they want to hear it at their playing position, and then take the stage bleed and supplement it with the FOH system.
Another good example is the current use of the acoustic guitar in modern rock/modern country. I rarely eq an acoustic guitar the same way for an acoustic/solo show and a full on band show. For the full band, I drastically cut the mids to move the tone above the other guitars. Often you will have to talk with the guitarist about this, especially if they want to check the instrument without the context of the other band. Actually, I have pushed several guitarists who are serious about how the whole band sounds into the "Nashville" tuning for the acoustic guitars. The Nashville tuning basically uses the octave strings from a 12 string set on a 6 string guitar to move the tome up. It sounds like crap by itself but works great in the mix.
Those are some of my thoughts for now. I will probably have something else later if this conversation continues.
but then I didn't even get a line check...another story.
