Mixdown, Dynamics & EQ (and related) Topic

[ljk32]

Yeah, if your computer can handle it, I'd go with just using a reverb on every channel needed. It is used for CPU-saving purposes, but another reason is that it gives the effect of all the elements in the track coming from the same space, since you're using the same reverb for everything. They say this approach glues the track together a bit more, but honestly, as I said, just go for every channel if you can.

[Neutronic]

Yeah, if your computer can handle it, I'd go with just using a reverb on every channel needed. It is used for CPU-saving purposes, but another reason is that it gives the effect of all the elements in the track coming from the same space, since you're using the same reverb for everything. They say this approach glues the track together a bit more, but honestly, as I said, just go for every channel if you can.

Oh okay thanks for the input guys

[Cardioid]

Yeah, if your computer can handle it, I'd go with just using a reverb on every channel needed. It is used for CPU-saving purposes, but another reason is that it gives the effect of all the elements in the track coming from the same space, since you're using the same reverb for everything. They say this approach glues the track together a bit more, but honestly, as I said, just go for every channel if you can.

Oh okay thanks for the input guys

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you mean that for instance a Delay/reverb will get its own mixer track?
If so, i know the answer...

Originally, time-based effects like delays or reverbs are used on an Auxilary track to still have a wet signal even though you've cut your volume on the mixer track from the sound the reverb belongs to.
Though signal processors like compressors, limiters and expanders are used at the insert points of a track because it will affect the whole signal so you don't need any wet or dry signal when you drop the volume of the track...

Ofcourse it isn't a must to use, and definately not in the EDM scene, but sound engineers will always use this method. But this is why they route a reverb/delay to a different auxilary/bus....
I hope this is what you wanted to know..

[Neutronic]

Yeah, if your computer can handle it, I'd go with just using a reverb on every channel needed. It is used for CPU-saving purposes, but another reason is that it gives the effect of all the elements in the track coming from the same space, since you're using the same reverb for everything. They say this approach glues the track together a bit more, but honestly, as I said, just go for every channel if you can.

Oh okay thanks for the input guys

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you mean that for instance a Delay/reverb will get its own mixer track?
If so, i know the answer...

Originally, time-based effects like delays or reverbs are used on an Auxilary track to still have a wet signal even though you've cut your volume on the mixer track from the sound the reverb belongs to.
Though signal processors like compressors, limiters and expanders are used at the insert points of a track because it will affect the whole signal so you don't have nrrf any wet or dry signal when you drop the volume of the track...

Ofcourse it isn't a must to use, and definately not in the EDM scene, but sound engineers will always use this method. But this is why they route a reverb/delay to a different auxilary/bus....
I hope this is what you wanted to know..

That is EXACTLY what I wanted to know Cool stuff!

[Cardioid]

Oh okay thanks for the input guys

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you mean that for instance a Delay/reverb will get its own mixer track?
If so, i know the answer...

Originally, time-based effects like delays or reverbs are used on an Auxilary track to still have a wet signal even though you've cut your volume on the mixer track from the sound the reverb belongs to.
Though signal processors like compressors, limiters and expanders are used at the insert points of a track because it will affect the whole signal so you don't need any wet or dry signal when you drop the volume of the track...

Ofcourse it isn't a must to use, and definately not in the EDM scene, but sound engineers will always use this method. But this is why they route a reverb/delay to a different auxilary/bus....
I hope this is what you wanted to know..

That is EXACTLY what I wanted to know Cool stuff!

Glad i could help man!

[Subject Zero]

Yeah, if your computer can handle it, I'd go with just using a reverb on every channel needed. It is used for CPU-saving purposes, but another reason is that it gives the effect of all the elements in the track coming from the same space, since you're using the same reverb for everything. They say this approach glues the track together a bit more, but honestly, as I said, just go for every channel if you can.

Oh okay thanks for the input guys

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you mean that for instance a Delay/reverb will get its own mixer track?
If so, i know the answer...

Originally, time-based effects like delays or reverbs are used on an Auxilary track to still have a wet signal even though you've cut your volume on the mixer track from the sound the reverb belongs to.
Though signal processors like compressors, limiters and expanders are used at the insert points of a track because it will affect the whole signal so you don't need any wet or dry signal when you drop the volume of the track...

Ofcourse it isn't a must to use, and definately not in the EDM scene, but sound engineers will always use this method. But this is why they route a reverb/delay to a different auxilary/bus....
I hope this is what you wanted to know..

^This

In University (studying music technology) we are taught to bus/send everything, which i guess gives us more control over everything and the effects on certain sounds, but when i'm working on my own personal stuff i don't really bother doing it.

[Nitrax]

This is something I have been wondering about since I started producing about 2 years ago...
What factors determine how loud a track sounds? Whenever I make something, and export it, it usually only sounds 75% as loud as other people's tracks when I compare, sometimes even less.

I'm sure this has something to do with mixing and/or mastering, but that still sounds weird to me, as I seem to be one of the only people whose every track sounds less loud than average?

Little example of a techno-ish track I've been producing which is like an extreme when it comes to this. Sounds about half as loud as audiofreq's speeka kikk (happens to be right below it on soundcloud). Does it have anything to do with the volume levels of individual mixer tracks?

NOTE: Just for sure, not advertising my track or asking for feedback here

[LiamChristopherShenk]

better mixdown = louder mastering
It's a combination of good compression, fixing dynamics, etc.

[Aftershoq]

Mastering is a big part of this.
A mixed down track should be between -6db & -4db before goin' to mastering. Then the masteringengineer got some room left to work with.

He will make it louder for you so don't worry about that.
You could better focus on your mixdown.

And if you want to play your track in a set or something, you've always got that alien thing called.. Volume knob.

[Exit Mind]

it's mainly about mastering.
compressing, limiting, cutting extreme high and low end frequencies. try a loudness maximizer here.
Google "loudness war". that's what it's all about!