►Get the free mixing workshop: sonicscoop.com/MixHabits ►Get the free mastering workshop: sonicscoop.com/Mastering101 ►Win free stuff at sonicscoop.com/contest ►Subscribe to the podcast or leave a rating and review here: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/sonicscoop-podcast/id1448330690
I mix and master for a living. I have dealt with this on several occasions. There have been times where the revision process resulted in all tonal, stereo imaging, and dynamic adjustments REMOVED besides limiting and routine high pass filtering. These were mixes where those things were really, really needed. The mixes sounded BAD. And the artist had no interest in changing them, and they didn't want to hire me to mix them. These demos were like, only mid-range. Muffled, no bass, inconsistent dynamics, everything panned to the center to where the stereo image was almost entirely mono. There was basically nothing below 80Hz and nothing above 4KHz, but they weren't having it. They weren't even intentionally going for "lofi." The end results were, in my opinion, so bad, that I asked not to be credited in one case, and asked to share mastering credits with the artist for the other. (Neither of them know how disappointed I was...I wasn't going to put that kind of energy into the process.) They had total Stockholm syndrome, though. They had huddled in their projects for so long, learning mixing as they went, taking guesses and experimenting. I asked them to listen to other music in similar genres and go back and forth from those records to their demo, but I don't think they did what I asked. I think that it may have even offended them by it, as they may have mistook my reference for an attempt to copy someone. And I had to let it go.
"As they may have mistook my reference for an attempt to copy someone" - Yeah my friend, from my 15 years of experience it is always a problem when I come up with a reference mix to a client that lost the objectivity, 7 out of 10 times they take it offensive and think I want to make them copy other artists, while I just want to "anchor" their hearing to frequencies, level balances, aesthetics of the genre they try to nail etc... Everytime I get a call saying "We have this new song, this has to be the best thing we did ever, we are so excited" I know I'm going to have a problem. lol
These 'proportions' of who we'll get as clients and creative partners is so true. Whether you're a producer or mixer, very few artists come to you like 'here's what i got and im done just go bananas and have a great time". Almost nothing in life is ever a clean hand-off like that. It's a paradigm we imagine but isnt very common or even as useful as we think. Anyway, thanks again!
Nice podcast... I’ve run into this issue a few times.... some clients are not sure of what they want and have no idea of how to explain what it is they need. In the end and after many revisions we finally got it to the place where we were both happy.
You just gave away my secret weapon! Haha.. not really but I do that double mix thing all the time. Especially with remixes. I’ll have one mix that just the solid remix and then do a version that is over effected and chopped up and then mix them together usually like 70/30. Great stuff as always!
Excellent post. I’m literally going through this same scenario right now with a client. I abhor revisions. But it does help to have a humbling attitude towards the idea and approach it with self control. I plan on finishing up the revision sometime this week and hope it’s everything the client wants....because the client “is” always right....it’s just really hard to say out loud. 😤
We love this segment, great advice on "the customer is always right". Transparency, serving the vision, and improving where it works. Justin is always both simultaneously a shining example, as well as down to earth and practical. He's mastered records for us where we needed more expert help and the things he is preaching here, we've seen the benefit of in real time. Always learning from him and SonicScoop. Stay up, cheers!
Super helpful, thank you so much for this and I think you're right on with the 50/50 split between clients who just want a better version of the original mix, and the ones who want a full dive in and do it mix, with the occasional 'go nuts' mix. The worst naturally are the ones that say 'I can't tell you what I want but I'll know it when I hear it', but your advice to get on the page of their favorite songs is great. Thanks!
Thanks for your interesting look at this topic! Funny you spoke about mixing the clients mix with your own to get a better sounding result. I recently recorded a group and found the studio recording mix lacked the energy and excitement of a live, very reverberant recording of them doing the same song. It took some careful time matching and some editing with their live recording, but when I finally merged them, it actually sounded better than either recording on its own. Yes, same deal kind of :-)
Actually having this issue nice talk, the thing is my client produccion has like 13 synth and the reference just like 3 between other stuff in the production process so as you said sometimes we need to give production tips to the clients, to get them to the sound and style they want.
I think it is valuable to be with the band in rehearsal and on gigs well in advance of planning a recording. This helps me to get a sense of direction and a feel for the vibe they are going for. Often I will track a band live to capture the energy of how they play for an audience on a gig, later overdubbing for embellishment or corrections as needed. It all comes down to communication with the artist to understand what their vision is and creating a plan to achieve it. Revisions are usually part of the plan. I often will print preliminary mixes to cd and share them with the band to play in their cars. After a few days meet up with them and discuss what they like and don't like . Take some notes and mix again with the decision maker(s) present. This usually leads to a favorable evolution of the project and at this point we are ready to talk about mastering.
Freaking great video and yes. It's a hard and subtle subject. How do you feel when you get a just starting music enthusiast that sort of knows what he wants, but their references have nothing to do with each other or what they are trying to make? I have struggled with that 2019 & 2020. It's odd, even if I try to reach out to their references and get into that mindset, they listen to something different and that's my biggest question always. How are you listening, what are you listening to, what draws your attention? It's really hard when they, as you so precisely said it from the beginning, they are so used to the demo sound. I almost agree with the client is "always" right mentality. Sometimes they might not even be able to describe something or know what to expect. I've had "producers" tell me if I can tune a vocal in mastering. Thanks for this video. I'll definetely show it around with students, friends and clients.
I really like your breakdown on this. I was thinking about what kind of client I am - I'm very in tune with my references, I produce the tracks and mix the tracks up to a point - as that's the style of music I make. and when I seek out great mixers to hire, its usually for that polishing phase - and I have noticed sometimes those mixers are fine with playing that role, and sometimes there's tension there. Sometimes I get the impression they want to co-produce, or they feel like i'm breaking certain rules or whatever. So, this is helpful to understand both sides of the coin! thanks
Solid advice as always ;:-) I've always thought good solutions to this dilemma could be....... 1- best case scenario......the artist is using the same DAW and plugins that you have, so they just send you their session exactly as they hear it. Then you can analyze what they've done, and just massage their mix to give it that extra 10-20% 2- Not having the the same DAW and plugs, the artist can print/bounce their tracks and effects(on their own tracks) exactly as they hear them. You bring them up in your DAW so you basically have their mix, and take it from there......you should also get their raw unprocessed tracks. Those are both for when the artist has a clear vision and really digs their rough/demo mix.....they just want that extra special sauce. The most challenging scenario is when the client doesn't really know how to express what they want, just that they "want it to be great"??.....and then you deliver a mix that you feel is solid, and they say "no no....this isn't right at all". Then if it descends into endless revision requests because nothing you do is exactly right, and they can't articulate what they want..... what to do then !?!?. If they pay a flat fee up front and you state they'll get maybe two revisions, and they're still not happy???. The idea of layering the client's mix and your mix I've never considered........wouldn't there be potential phase issues??. There can be anomalies between systems....plugin latencies??.
Revisions are so easy now. It used to be you'd have to make recall sheets for the entire studio. With analog knobs and the fact that you will always forget to document something, it was literally impossible to truly recall a mix. So once you spent hours resetting the entire control room you'd still have to do a lot of tweaking to get the same vibe going. On top of that, your masters were in a perpetual state of decay. Every time you passed the play head you'd lose some small amount of fidelity. I mix 100% in the box now. If a client calls with a request I can have their mix up and be ready to work in 20 seconds. I can have an MP3 with simple changes in their inbox while we are still on the phone. I think Justin nails it regarding communication and referencing. I can't meet a clients expectations if I don't know what they expect. Of course many times the beginning of the process can seem confusing. We all have different ways of looking at the world and our personal language develops around that. Artists love injecting even more color into their language. Also, the properties of the things we are trying to discuss are nebulous at times. So we frequently have to work a little harder to understand the people we're working with. Which is one of the things I love about this business. Most projects develop a language of their own. "Pee on that upper midrange gurgle. It's keeping the skin tight." These are some techniques I use: Unless the project is ultra low budget I always build a grid on the ones at least. Arrangement edits are extremely common. If there are no markers I create them. Makes for quicker response in phone convos. Before I send the client 1st mixes I've already saved Lead Vox/Inst up 0.5dB and down 0.5dB session files. That's usually the first request. I'll do the same if I take it upon myself to do something we haven't discussed. That B3 that I drenched in distortion? Two mix versions. Which will usually necessarily include several other changes that make everything hit correctly. If we've discussed trying different approaches I do complete mixes before sending out firsts. I only send the one that seems closest to the vibe I'm getting and don't print the second until asked. Documentation is critical. I used to try to use complex file naming conventions and it just got messy. Now I simply use numbers. Mix_001.cwp. I have a spreadsheet for each project with detailed notes. I put the clients remarks in the spreadsheet. I send only MP3s until the client makes a final decision and that is when I send the first Song.wav file with only the song title as the name. If the client loses track of the file somehow I can consult the spreadsheet and send another. Once I've printed a final I listen to it all the way through, just in case. At the end I copy the entire project, mix files, wav files, spreadsheets, invoices, and anything else - less sensitive personal information - and put it on two new USB sticks and send both to the client. I put a text file in the root named _!2006_05_23_MoonbeamsAndMischief. In the text file I give an identifying description of the project. Finals are in a root folder that contains only finals that is loudly labeled " !FINALS".
Very mature and balanced outlook. It could be applied to any creative professional endeavor. You can have clients that like things that you don't like. But at the end of the day they are paying you to make them happy and satisfied with the product, not yourself.
Really excellent video thanks! There's something I get a lot which maybe you have some advice on. A client will give me 2 or 3 references that all sound really different from each other. They might be the same genre but almost everything else about them is different in terms of the mix. I get this a a lot. Of course I ask what is it about each mix they like and I get things back such as "I like the warmth in these mixes etc..." yet I can't hear anything in common between them that I can identify as on of the many meanings of "warmth". :-D Further discussions typically go further down the adjective rabbit hole. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
You didn't ask me, but I'll take a stab at it, as OJ would say... There are a couple of options that I can think of. The first is to just "do your thing." Whatever it is that you do as a mix/mastering engineer, do that, within the confines of the genre. It seems like maybe what they're saying, but trying to sound like they're not, is, "We just want it to sound awesome, like these references!" By which they mean they want it to sound finished, polished, professional. So do that. The second option that comes to mind is to just pick one of the references, the one that's closest in style to their recording, & make it the only reference. Just pretend the others don't exist. Just my two cents.
The client is always right! Client record him self and than hi listen his own record every day. Than hi get the mix from you. And you get problem from him.
Chris Lord-Alge had a video recently where he mixed the winner of some contest or other and it was very enlightening: he would A-B between the artist's mix and his, and I'd be thinking "Hmm, that's nice" with the original and then "OMFG!" when he switched to his mix. At the same time, I was wondering if he was going somewhere they didn't want to go.
If it wasn't for the left eyebrow making you somewhat relatable, I couldn't even take you seriously. Too damn handsome. Bruce Campbell + John Hamm. That's what just happened. Haha. Great advice. Subscribed. Thanks!
Hello Justin , I just got a used Focusrite ISA two and I know you like Focusrite produts do you have some advice about that one ? Thanks for your gifts of knowledge and wisdom.
I know this is off topic, and I mean it in the best possible way, but you have a very anachronistic mug. You would make a great character actor for period pieces or a model for granite busts. Just saying. Anyway back to the audio content...
Yeah I think we always have to follow customers test and vision at first. But personally, after trying to help them to achieve that and we’re not getting there is healthy for both take another way.
Your name is attached to a bad mix. I can understand doing a revision if it's just that bad, serious problems that initially went unnoticed. The clients I have at times are splitting hairs. "At approximately 1:42 into the song my vocal appears to slightly change the tone, and my vocal seems to be 1/1000th of a second to the right, so can you put that to the left?". Then after doing what they asked. "You know... I'm not sure if I like this, can you put it back the way we had it and then automate some reverb on that part?" Later on. "Nope, that doesn't work, you don't seem to know what you're doing, I'm just going to go to a REAL engineer who has a studio. You need to learn how to mix before you can touch my stuff again." 🤦♀️ I get this way too often. I'm just going to charge $100,000 a mix so they will all go away.
This happens very often to me :') I'm not sure if it has to do with the social i met them at, as many artists that use it are very amateur (there's a few that are really professional tho). Currently dealing with that case right now (reason why I looked this video up, to feel a bit represented, you know? when it happens i can never be 100% sure it is my fault).
@@xiuyxy What it is, is artists don't trust anyone. They want to do everything themselves, instead of trusting the skills of the engineer, the producer, the mastering engineer, so on and so forth. The whole point of having someone mix their song, is for their perspective and gear. They just don't know how to use the gear. Eventually some will just start mixing their own records, and it will turn out awful, but they are happy.
@@vigilantestylez many of the people who request my services for mixing can afford to spend money on advertisement, but aren't willing to pay $30 for a mix because of the "Nope, that doesn't work, you don't seem to know what you're doing, I'm just going to go to a REAL engineer who has a studio. You need to learn how to mix before you can touch my stuff again." trope. It's unfortunate I gave away full mixes in wav to some of these "artists" before (not anymore, learned my lesson). It's a waste of time to deal with these kind, but sometimes it's a 50/50 risk I'm willing to take (I have been mixing for clients for around 2 years now, but still don't have an stable source of income, so any opportunity there is, is valuable. Specially if I take the chance to make a good impression and keep clients).
Also, when artists want a more "crazy" mixer they'll often reach out to someone who is mainly a producer, a good case being Björk working with Bobby Krlic on Vulnicura (the Sound on Sound article about that album might still be one of the most inspiring pieces of journalism I've ever read)
One of this days " i will tell the truth to every one what there are looking for" some guys are the bridge to haven, but it is not for everyone to get there" you can feel when you are the bridge or not, but you still lie your ass" why ! couse their 💰" no, people will look for you, even companies will too, when they 👂 what you can do. "it is an universal language. Amen" to the Holley spirit.
I wish someone told this to my mix engineer before he forced me to accept his narrow minded mix with only 3 revisions and wouldn't even send me his stems or raw tracks so I could show him what I was looking for by doing a mix of it myself
►Get the free mixing workshop: sonicscoop.com/MixHabits
►Get the free mastering workshop: sonicscoop.com/Mastering101
►Win free stuff at sonicscoop.com/contest
►Subscribe to the podcast or leave a rating and review here: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/sonicscoop-podcast/id1448330690
I mix and master for a living. I have dealt with this on several occasions. There have been times where the revision process resulted in all tonal, stereo imaging, and dynamic adjustments REMOVED besides limiting and routine high pass filtering. These were mixes where those things were really, really needed. The mixes sounded BAD. And the artist had no interest in changing them, and they didn't want to hire me to mix them. These demos were like, only mid-range. Muffled, no bass, inconsistent dynamics, everything panned to the center to where the stereo image was almost entirely mono. There was basically nothing below 80Hz and nothing above 4KHz, but they weren't having it. They weren't even intentionally going for "lofi." The end results were, in my opinion, so bad, that I asked not to be credited in one case, and asked to share mastering credits with the artist for the other. (Neither of them know how disappointed I was...I wasn't going to put that kind of energy into the process.) They had total Stockholm syndrome, though. They had huddled in their projects for so long, learning mixing as they went, taking guesses and experimenting. I asked them to listen to other music in similar genres and go back and forth from those records to their demo, but I don't think they did what I asked. I think that it may have even offended them by it, as they may have mistook my reference for an attempt to copy someone. And I had to let it go.
"As they may have mistook my reference for an attempt to copy someone" - Yeah my friend, from my 15 years of experience it is always a problem when I come up with a reference mix to a client that lost the objectivity, 7 out of 10 times they take it offensive and think I want to make them copy other artists, while I just want to "anchor" their hearing to frequencies, level balances, aesthetics of the genre they try to nail etc...
Everytime I get a call saying "We have this new song, this has to be the best thing we did ever, we are so excited" I know I'm going to have a problem. lol
sometimes a producer/engineer thinks theyre dealing with a "problem client" but its actually the artist dealing with a "problem engineer"
True story!
-Justin
Indeed. A little humility on our end never hurts.
These 'proportions' of who we'll get as clients and creative partners is so true. Whether you're a producer or mixer, very few artists come to you like 'here's what i got and im done just go bananas and have a great time". Almost nothing in life is ever a clean hand-off like that. It's a paradigm we imagine but isnt very common or even as useful as we think. Anyway, thanks again!
Nice podcast... I’ve run into this issue a few times.... some clients are not sure of what they want and have no idea of how to explain what it is they need. In the end and after many revisions we finally got it to the place where we were both happy.
You just gave away my secret weapon! Haha.. not really but I do that double mix thing all the time. Especially with remixes. I’ll have one mix that just the solid remix and then do a version that is over effected and chopped up and then mix them together usually like 70/30. Great stuff as always!
Excellent post. I’m literally going through this same scenario right now with a client. I abhor revisions. But it does help to have a humbling attitude towards the idea and approach it with self control. I plan on finishing up the revision sometime this week and hope it’s everything the client wants....because the client “is” always right....it’s just really hard to say out loud. 😤
I love these advices, thank you for taking the time to share your experience and help us improve!
We love this segment, great advice on "the customer is always right". Transparency, serving the vision, and improving where it works. Justin is always both simultaneously a shining example, as well as down to earth and practical. He's mastered records for us where we needed more expert help and the things he is preaching here, we've seen the benefit of in real time. Always learning from him and SonicScoop. Stay up, cheers!
This is golden! Super helpful! The Mixcon w/ Jeff Ellis is great. Really enjoyed it. Paul Womack as well. Great stuff!
Super helpful, thank you so much for this and I think you're right on with the 50/50 split between clients who just want a better version of the original mix, and the ones who want a full dive in and do it mix, with the occasional 'go nuts' mix. The worst naturally are the ones that say 'I can't tell you what I want but I'll know it when I hear it', but your advice to get on the page of their favorite songs is great. Thanks!
Thanks for your interesting look at this topic! Funny you spoke about mixing the clients mix with your own to get a better sounding result. I recently recorded a group and found the studio recording mix lacked the energy and excitement of a live, very reverberant recording of them doing the same song. It took some careful time matching and some editing with their live recording, but when I finally merged them, it actually sounded better than either recording on its own. Yes, same deal kind of :-)
Very cool!
Actually having this issue nice talk, the thing is my client produccion has like 13 synth and the reference just like 3 between other stuff in the production process so as you said sometimes we need to give production tips to the clients, to get them to the sound and style they want.
I think it is valuable to be with the band in rehearsal and on gigs well in advance of planning a recording.
This helps me to get a sense of direction and a feel for the vibe they are going for.
Often I will track a band live to capture the energy of how they play for an audience on a gig, later overdubbing for embellishment or corrections as needed.
It all comes down to communication with the artist to understand what their vision is and creating a plan to achieve it.
Revisions are usually part of the plan.
I often will print preliminary mixes to cd and share them with the band to play in their cars. After a few days meet up with them and discuss what they like and don't like . Take some notes and mix again with the decision maker(s) present.
This usually leads to a favorable evolution of the project and at this point we are ready to talk about mastering.
Freaking great video and yes. It's a hard and subtle subject. How do you feel when you get a just starting music enthusiast that sort of knows what he wants, but their references have nothing to do with each other or what they are trying to make? I have struggled with that 2019 & 2020. It's odd, even if I try to reach out to their references and get into that mindset, they listen to something different and that's my biggest question always. How are you listening, what are you listening to, what draws your attention? It's really hard when they, as you so precisely said it from the beginning, they are so used to the demo sound.
I almost agree with the client is "always" right mentality. Sometimes they might not even be able to describe something or know what to expect. I've had "producers" tell me if I can tune a vocal in mastering. Thanks for this video. I'll definetely show it around with students, friends and clients.
I really like your breakdown on this. I was thinking about what kind of client I am - I'm very in tune with my references, I produce the tracks and mix the tracks up to a point - as that's the style of music I make. and when I seek out great mixers to hire, its usually for that polishing phase - and I have noticed sometimes those mixers are fine with playing that role, and sometimes there's tension there. Sometimes I get the impression they want to co-produce, or they feel like i'm breaking certain rules or whatever. So, this is helpful to understand both sides of the coin! thanks
Hey, I'm glad YOU commented & that I read your comment. It's great for us engineers to get your perspective, as well. Thank you.
Solid advice as always ;:-)
I've always thought good solutions to this dilemma could be.......
1- best case scenario......the artist is using the same DAW and plugins that you have, so they just send you their session exactly as they hear it. Then you can analyze what they've done, and just massage their mix to give it that extra 10-20%
2- Not having the the same DAW and plugs, the artist can print/bounce their tracks and effects(on their own tracks) exactly as they hear them. You bring them up in your DAW so you basically have their mix, and take it from there......you should also get their raw unprocessed tracks.
Those are both for when the artist has a clear vision and really digs their rough/demo mix.....they just want that extra special sauce.
The most challenging scenario is when the client doesn't really know how to express what they want, just that they "want it to be great"??.....and then you deliver a mix that you feel is solid, and they say "no no....this isn't right at all". Then if it descends into endless revision requests because nothing you do is exactly right, and they can't articulate what they want..... what to do then !?!?. If they pay a flat fee up front and you state they'll get maybe two revisions, and they're still not happy???.
The idea of layering the client's mix and your mix I've never considered........wouldn't there be potential phase issues??. There can be anomalies between systems....plugin latencies??.
Revisions are so easy now. It used to be you'd have to make recall sheets for the entire studio. With analog knobs and the fact that you will always forget to document something, it was literally impossible to truly recall a mix. So once you spent hours resetting the entire control room you'd still have to do a lot of tweaking to get the same vibe going. On top of that, your masters were in a perpetual state of decay. Every time you passed the play head you'd lose some small amount of fidelity.
I mix 100% in the box now. If a client calls with a request I can have their mix up and be ready to work in 20 seconds. I can have an MP3 with simple changes in their inbox while we are still on the phone. I think Justin nails it regarding communication and referencing. I can't meet a clients expectations if I don't know what they expect. Of course many times the beginning of the process can seem confusing. We all have different ways of looking at the world and our personal language develops around that. Artists love injecting even more color into their language. Also, the properties of the things we are trying to discuss are nebulous at times. So we frequently have to work a little harder to understand the people we're working with. Which is one of the things I love about this business. Most projects develop a language of their own. "Pee on that upper midrange gurgle. It's keeping the skin tight."
These are some techniques I use: Unless the project is ultra low budget I always build a grid on the ones at least. Arrangement edits are extremely common. If there are no markers I create them. Makes for quicker response in phone convos. Before I send the client 1st mixes I've already saved Lead Vox/Inst up 0.5dB and down 0.5dB session files. That's usually the first request. I'll do the same if I take it upon myself to do something we haven't discussed. That B3 that I drenched in distortion? Two mix versions. Which will usually necessarily include several other changes that make everything hit correctly. If we've discussed trying different approaches I do complete mixes before sending out firsts. I only send the one that seems closest to the vibe I'm getting and don't print the second until asked. Documentation is critical. I used to try to use complex file naming conventions and it just got messy. Now I simply use numbers. Mix_001.cwp. I have a spreadsheet for each project with detailed notes. I put the clients remarks in the spreadsheet. I send only MP3s until the client makes a final decision and that is when I send the first Song.wav file with only the song title as the name. If the client loses track of the file somehow I can consult the spreadsheet and send another. Once I've printed a final I listen to it all the way through, just in case. At the end I copy the entire project, mix files, wav files, spreadsheets, invoices, and anything else - less sensitive personal information - and put it on two new USB sticks and send both to the client. I put a text file in the root named _!2006_05_23_MoonbeamsAndMischief. In the text file I give an identifying description of the project. Finals are in a root folder that contains only finals that is loudly labeled " !FINALS".
Good video. Definitely something I'm struggling with as well
well said! thanks for your videos 😁
Very mature and balanced outlook. It could be applied to any creative professional endeavor. You can have clients that like things that you don't like. But at the end of the day they are paying you to make them happy and satisfied with the product, not yourself.
that's how I mix - like the demo lol
Really excellent video thanks! There's something I get a lot which maybe you have some advice on. A client will give me 2 or 3 references that all sound really different from each other. They might be the same genre but almost everything else about them is different in terms of the mix. I get this a a lot. Of course I ask what is it about each mix they like and I get things back such as "I like the warmth in these mixes etc..." yet I can't hear anything in common between them that I can identify as on of the many meanings of "warmth". :-D Further discussions typically go further down the adjective rabbit hole. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
You didn't ask me, but I'll take a stab at it, as OJ would say... There are a couple of options that I can think of.
The first is to just "do your thing." Whatever it is that you do as a mix/mastering engineer, do that, within the confines of the genre. It seems like maybe what they're saying, but trying to sound like they're not, is, "We just want it to sound awesome, like these references!" By which they mean they want it to sound finished, polished, professional. So do that.
The second option that comes to mind is to just pick one of the references, the one that's closest in style to their recording, & make it the only reference. Just pretend the others don't exist.
Just my two cents.
The client is always right!
Client record him self and than hi listen his own record every day.
Than hi get the mix from you.
And you get problem from him.
Chris Lord-Alge had a video recently where he mixed the winner of some contest or other and it was very enlightening: he would A-B between the artist's mix and his, and I'd be thinking "Hmm, that's nice" with the original and then "OMFG!" when he switched to his mix. At the same time, I was wondering if he was going somewhere they didn't want to go.
@@pitchforkincCan you imagine telling CLA you like your mix better? Ha ha!
If it wasn't for the left eyebrow making you somewhat relatable, I couldn't even take you seriously. Too damn handsome. Bruce Campbell + John Hamm. That's what just happened. Haha. Great advice. Subscribed. Thanks!
Hello Justin , I just got a used Focusrite ISA two and I know you like Focusrite produts do you have some advice about that one ? Thanks for your gifts of knowledge and wisdom.
I know this is off topic, and I mean it in the best possible way, but you have a very anachronistic mug. You would make a great character actor for period pieces or a model for granite busts. Just saying. Anyway back to the audio content...
For real though.
replacement for Bruce Campbell :-D
I think you win the comments section today 🤣
Yeah I think we always have to follow customers test and vision at first. But personally, after trying to help them to achieve that and we’re not getting there is healthy for both take another way.
Your name is attached to a bad mix. I can understand doing a revision if it's just that bad, serious problems that initially went unnoticed. The clients I have at times are splitting hairs. "At approximately 1:42 into the song my vocal appears to slightly change the tone, and my vocal seems to be 1/1000th of a second to the right, so can you put that to the left?". Then after doing what they asked. "You know... I'm not sure if I like this, can you put it back the way we had it and then automate some reverb on that part?" Later on. "Nope, that doesn't work, you don't seem to know what you're doing, I'm just going to go to a REAL engineer who has a studio. You need to learn how to mix before you can touch my stuff again." 🤦♀️ I get this way too often. I'm just going to charge $100,000 a mix so they will all go away.
This happens very often to me :')
I'm not sure if it has to do with the social i met them at, as many artists that use it are very amateur (there's a few that are really professional tho).
Currently dealing with that case right now (reason why I looked this video up, to feel a bit represented, you know? when it happens i can never be 100% sure it is my fault).
@@xiuyxy What it is, is artists don't trust anyone. They want to do everything themselves, instead of trusting the skills of the engineer, the producer, the mastering engineer, so on and so forth. The whole point of having someone mix their song, is for their perspective and gear. They just don't know how to use the gear. Eventually some will just start mixing their own records, and it will turn out awful, but they are happy.
@@vigilantestylez many of the people who request my services for mixing can afford to spend money on advertisement, but aren't willing to pay $30 for a mix because of the "Nope, that doesn't work, you don't seem to know what you're doing, I'm just going to go to a REAL engineer who has a studio. You need to learn how to mix before you can touch my stuff again." trope. It's unfortunate I gave away full mixes in wav to some of these "artists" before (not anymore, learned my lesson). It's a waste of time to deal with these kind, but sometimes it's a 50/50 risk I'm willing to take (I have been mixing for clients for around 2 years now, but still don't have an stable source of income, so any opportunity there is, is valuable. Specially if I take the chance to make a good impression and keep clients).
I'm giving you 5 starts right here
Sweet! Thanks much. It helps us a LOT if you drop 5 stars right here: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/sonicscoop-podcast/id1448330690
Great vid! We're all our own little snowflakes doing our own little snowflake mixy thing
Thanks for your work Justin !
Also, my wife prefers your shorter hair ! :D
So does mine 🙃
Interesting... blending mixes, they did that on Coldplay songs '42' and 'Viva La Vida'
Whoa
do you voice "jerry" from Rick & Morty?
Also, when artists want a more "crazy" mixer they'll often reach out to someone who is mainly a producer, a good case being Björk working with Bobby Krlic on Vulnicura (the Sound on Sound article about that album might still be one of the most inspiring pieces of journalism I've ever read)
Will have to check that out!
Wow!
Stupid question.....how in the hell do you combine a mix
Very carefully.
words
One of this days " i will tell the truth to every one what there are looking for" some guys are the bridge to haven, but it is not for everyone to get there" you can feel when you are the bridge or not, but you still lie your ass" why ! couse their 💰" no,
people will look for you, even companies will too, when they 👂 what you can do. "it is an universal language. Amen" to the Holley spirit.
I wish someone told this to my mix engineer before he forced me to accept his narrow minded mix with only 3 revisions and wouldn't even send me his stems or raw tracks so I could show him what I was looking for by doing a mix of it myself
Let’s say the customer is always right. Just because you bought a plane ticket 🎟 doesn’t mean you can fly the plane ✈️