HF Reference Tip

[Telefunkin]

Having bought decent monitors and headphones (although they are far from the top of the range) I've still learned a new trick. I guess its pretty obvious, but I'm amazed what I've discovered about one or two of my mixes that otherwise sounded fine with my usual monitoring kit. The secret..........cheap ear-buds!

I don't use my music computer for any on-line work, browsing, forums, emails, Taxi submissions, etc. I use a separate laptop, usually in a completely different room, so I can't connect to the same monitoring system. Last week, I broke the lead on my old lightweight headphones that I usually use, but bought some really cheap ear-buds as a temporary solution for listening to the youtube examples (a la's) and also for final checks on my mp3 files before uploading them. I had every intention of getting some more decent headphones, but now I'm not so sure I should.

There's not much bass and the mids are dipped with these ear-buds, leaving the top-end far more exposed. Consequently, during a few final checks on my mixes I've spotted some over-hot shakers, crashes and other high-end activity that jumped out as not sitting in the mix properly. These nasty little things could be the best $5 investment I've ever made. So, if you're not confident of high frequency monitoring ability (especially if you've a bit of hearing loss up there, like me) then give them a go and see if they help you weed out the sizzles too.

[Len911]

Another tip is an analyzer. Maybe you can see what you can't hear.

For example, in the extreme case, if you use a sonogram, and most cd's you listen to are gold at 5k, and your mix is dark blue, then you know there is a problem, and you might want to eq and cut at 5k until your mix is closer to the gold. It's not going to help a deaf person win a grammy mixing, however, technically it is more accurate than any analog monitoring system, but it can when used in conjunction with monitoring provide a more accurate landscape and help in identifying problems.

https://www.meldaproduction.com/MMultiA ... w=analysis

[Len911]

Also, I wonder how much is in the mixing, and how much is attributed to an extreme limiting preset in the "mastering"?

I know for myself I can spend a lot of time mixing, and not much time choosing a limiting preset.

[Telefunkin]

Hi Len,
Nothing so fancy as visualisers here. I check the frequency content (Fab Filter Pro Q2) and I use a limiter (still like JB Barricade freebie, even though its only 32-bit) but clearly I've let the odd high-frequency event slip through. Maybe I'll invest in another set of these grotty ear-buds and keep them by my music computer for a last pass listen. They're cheap enough

[guscave]

Weather you’re using multi-million dollar studio or earbuds, you still want to listen to your mix in as many different systems and rooms (or car). It’s very easy to get use to how things sound on your own system and after awhile you may forget that you have to compensate certain frequencies so that you music sounds good anywhere.

I posted this in another thread, but check out Sonarworks headphone calibration software.
You’ll still need to get some decent headphones, cause I don’t think it will work with earbuds, but it’s definitely worth it. My mixing time ( quality) has improved a lot since I started using it a few days ago.

[jazzstan]

Graham ... great suggestion. I've thought about doing the earbud-test thing. Perhaps I haven't cuz I don't wanna know!!

On the visual side, Voxengo Span is a free VST. Rather handy.

Stan

[MattCurious]

Absolutely agree on the rubbish ear buds. My current monitoring environment is awful so I don't "push air" much (except, ironically, to use my "proper" monitors as a kind of grotbox). I always have a few different types of headphones on the desk along with some studio cans to get different perspectives. I try to have some "free with a phone" type buds, a "decent" £40 pair and then studio cans.

[mojobone]

Well, there's no reason not to have a pair of cheap earbuds; they're cheap, after all, and such gadgets are known to have resonant peaks at harsh frequencies, but the trouble is...they're not all alike. Monoprice's $6 buds sound nothing like the ones that come with an iDevice, so I don't see much utility other than, for a "Yep, that sounds horrible, all right." sorta reality check. The reason Auratones are so useful is that so many mixers use them. They're the same anywhere you go, or you can take them with you. I tend to mix for the best case scenario and master for the worst, so there might be a place for these things nearer the end of the process.

[Telefunkin]

Hi Gus, I've downloaded the demo for the headphone calibration software, so I'll see (hear) whether it helps me. Thanks for the heads (ears?)-up on that one.

The point of my comment, as Mojo says, is that for a few dollars (or nothing, if you happen to have some kicking around already) there's no reason not to have a final sanity check on a mix with these things. I certainly wouldn't advocate using them as a serious final stage mixing tool, but they can offer a another perspective on how well (or badly) your mix translates to the listening choice of so many people, particular youngsters. You might question whether it matters if the intended use for your music is reality TV, or when someone else will master it anyway. I wouldn't argue. I'm simply saying that translation of a recent mix of mine to the ear-bud listening environment was a surprise for me. Mostly, I get the top end reasonably well sorted, but in future, if I've any doubts about whether I've over-cooked the cymbals and shakers I'll definitely try ear-bud test.

[jazzstan]

Mojo...

"Yep, that sounds horrible, all right."