All language subtitles for MWTM5

af Afrikaans
sq Albanian
am Amharic
ar Arabic
hy Armenian
az Azerbaijani
eu Basque
be Belarusian
bn Bengali
bs Bosnian
bg Bulgarian
ca Catalan
ceb Cebuano
ny Chichewa
zh-CN Chinese (Simplified)
zh-TW Chinese (Traditional) Download
co Corsican
hr Croatian
cs Czech
da Danish
nl Dutch
en English
eo Esperanto
et Estonian
tl Filipino
fi Finnish
fr French
fy Frisian
gl Galician
ka Georgian
de German
el Greek
gu Gujarati
ht Haitian Creole
ha Hausa
haw Hawaiian
iw Hebrew
hi Hindi
hmn Hmong
hu Hungarian
is Icelandic
ig Igbo
id Indonesian
ga Irish
it Italian
ja Japanese
jw Javanese
kn Kannada
kk Kazakh
km Khmer
ko Korean
ku Kurdish (Kurmanji)
ky Kyrgyz
lo Lao
la Latin
lv Latvian
lt Lithuanian
lb Luxembourgish
mk Macedonian
mg Malagasy
ms Malay
ml Malayalam
mt Maltese
mi Maori
mr Marathi
mn Mongolian
my Myanmar (Burmese)
ne Nepali
no Norwegian
ps Pashto
fa Persian
pl Polish
pt Portuguese
pa Punjabi
ro Romanian
ru Russian
sm Samoan
gd Scots Gaelic
sr Serbian
st Sesotho
sn Shona
sd Sindhi
si Sinhala
sk Slovak
sl Slovenian
so Somali
es Spanish
su Sundanese
sw Swahili
sv Swedish
tg Tajik
ta Tamil
te Telugu
th Thai
tr Turkish
uk Ukrainian
ur Urdu
uz Uzbek
vi Vietnamese
cy Welsh
xh Xhosa
yi Yiddish
yo Yoruba
zu Zulu
or Odia (Oriya)
rw Kinyarwanda
tk Turkmen
tt Tatar
ug Uyghur
Would you like to inspect the original subtitles? These are the user uploaded subtitles that are being translated: 1 00:00:07,660 --> 00:00:11,210 hello everybody Joe chicka relly here 2 00:00:11,210 --> 00:00:13,850 we're at the beautiful wonderful la 3 00:00:13,850 --> 00:00:16,369 Fabrique studios in the South of France 4 00:00:16,369 --> 00:00:18,710 we just finished a week at mix with the 5 00:00:18,710 --> 00:00:23,029 Masters fantastic just magical week with 6 00:00:23,029 --> 00:00:26,449 13 participants that that shared their 7 00:00:26,449 --> 00:00:30,380 ideas and quite quite a fun week and we 8 00:00:30,380 --> 00:00:32,720 had the beautiful and talented Rachael 9 00:00:32,720 --> 00:00:35,780 Yamagata here singing and recording a 10 00:00:35,780 --> 00:00:38,360 track with us and quite inspiring for 11 00:00:38,360 --> 00:00:41,390 everybody we have some questions from 12 00:00:41,390 --> 00:00:46,030 from the sports fans and the gear addix 13 00:00:46,030 --> 00:00:51,400 and the first question from Daniel Elba 14 00:00:51,400 --> 00:00:54,199 Daniel is asking about basically how to 15 00:00:54,199 --> 00:00:57,290 get started in the business and what the 16 00:00:57,290 --> 00:01:00,229 best way for a young engineer is whether 17 00:01:00,229 --> 00:01:02,080 he should take the traditional approach 18 00:01:02,080 --> 00:01:05,750 which is working at a major studio and 19 00:01:05,750 --> 00:01:08,240 kind of working his way up the ladder 20 00:01:08,240 --> 00:01:13,070 from gofer to assistant engineer to 21 00:01:13,070 --> 00:01:16,580 first engineer or if he should go to a 22 00:01:16,580 --> 00:01:19,850 recording school and take the approach 23 00:01:19,850 --> 00:01:22,870 of working in his own private studio 24 00:01:22,870 --> 00:01:26,600 cultivating a client base and maybe 25 00:01:26,600 --> 00:01:29,000 coming up with his own unique way of 26 00:01:29,000 --> 00:01:32,600 recording I think honestly both 27 00:01:32,600 --> 00:01:35,110 approaches work the traditional one 28 00:01:35,110 --> 00:01:37,670 unfortunately there's less and less 29 00:01:37,670 --> 00:01:41,120 opportunities there's less and less 30 00:01:41,120 --> 00:01:42,470 commercial studios 31 00:01:42,470 --> 00:01:45,680 sadly less opportunities you're going to 32 00:01:45,680 --> 00:01:47,870 have to do a lot of dirty work a lot of 33 00:01:47,870 --> 00:01:50,840 cleaning floors and coiling microphone 34 00:01:50,840 --> 00:01:54,560 cables like I did and but the positive 35 00:01:54,560 --> 00:01:57,320 thing is you can be around other 36 00:01:57,320 --> 00:02:01,700 engineers and producers and learn from 37 00:02:01,700 --> 00:02:04,010 them and that's one of the really 38 00:02:04,010 --> 00:02:07,040 amazing pluses is seeing different of 39 00:02:07,040 --> 00:02:09,560 different people work their workflows 40 00:02:09,560 --> 00:02:14,560 their style their their sounds their 41 00:02:14,560 --> 00:02:16,640 conceptualization that's really 42 00:02:16,640 --> 00:02:19,270 important that's how I learned and and 43 00:02:19,270 --> 00:02:23,290 and that was really wonderful for me now 44 00:02:23,290 --> 00:02:26,710 you can start your own studio build your 45 00:02:26,710 --> 00:02:29,530 client base and learn in your own unique 46 00:02:29,530 --> 00:02:33,120 way that's cool too you may end up 47 00:02:33,120 --> 00:02:36,340 carving a very unique and specialized 48 00:02:36,340 --> 00:02:38,290 niche for yourself could be really good 49 00:02:38,290 --> 00:02:40,540 and then later you can always go and 50 00:02:40,540 --> 00:02:43,330 work with other producers and learn from 51 00:02:43,330 --> 00:02:45,490 other producers and engineers their 52 00:02:45,490 --> 00:02:48,010 style in fact that that might even be a 53 00:02:48,010 --> 00:02:50,890 good way to do it because you'll have 54 00:02:50,890 --> 00:02:53,680 developed a lot of the basic techniques 55 00:02:53,680 --> 00:02:55,900 things that you didn't learn in school 56 00:02:55,900 --> 00:02:57,820 and then you'll be able to really 57 00:02:57,820 --> 00:03:00,460 understand other producers and engineers 58 00:03:00,460 --> 00:03:03,550 their workflow their their thought 59 00:03:03,550 --> 00:03:07,000 processes so perhaps that way can work 60 00:03:07,000 --> 00:03:09,160 too so it's really what's best for you 61 00:03:09,160 --> 00:03:11,980 it's a life decision more it is a career 62 00:03:11,980 --> 00:03:16,440 decision ok next questions from cheat - 63 00:03:16,440 --> 00:03:20,050 Alexandre and he's asking about vocals 64 00:03:20,050 --> 00:03:23,320 in a mix and how do you make them sit 65 00:03:23,320 --> 00:03:25,810 well in the mix and glue to the track 66 00:03:25,810 --> 00:03:28,630 good question and he's talking about 67 00:03:28,630 --> 00:03:31,060 pretty much in the box techniques but 68 00:03:31,060 --> 00:03:34,930 honestly what I do in the box I would do 69 00:03:34,930 --> 00:03:37,810 outside the box and first of all it 70 00:03:37,810 --> 00:03:42,209 tends to be parallel compression 71 00:03:42,209 --> 00:03:44,620 sometimes I might put a bit of a 72 00:03:44,620 --> 00:03:47,440 compressor on the insert of the vocal 73 00:03:47,440 --> 00:03:50,470 just to give it a tone keep the peaks 74 00:03:50,470 --> 00:03:53,620 under control I might do more of my 75 00:03:53,620 --> 00:03:56,410 compression in the parallel compression 76 00:03:56,410 --> 00:03:59,320 I blend that in with the normal lead 77 00:03:59,320 --> 00:04:04,510 vocal track I add 20 30% just depends 78 00:04:04,510 --> 00:04:07,120 often I'll use multiple parallel 79 00:04:07,120 --> 00:04:10,660 compressors perhaps I'll mix and match 80 00:04:10,660 --> 00:04:13,330 things one compressor because it has a 81 00:04:13,330 --> 00:04:15,580 certain sound I'll use that in the verse 82 00:04:15,580 --> 00:04:17,830 another compressor that perhaps has a 83 00:04:17,830 --> 00:04:20,470 bigger or more aggressive sound I might 84 00:04:20,470 --> 00:04:22,810 use that in the chorus could even use a 85 00:04:22,810 --> 00:04:25,419 third one for the bridge just depends on 86 00:04:25,419 --> 00:04:29,710 the song but I will definitely apply 87 00:04:29,710 --> 00:04:32,870 some sort of effects even when 88 00:04:32,870 --> 00:04:37,340 Vogel wants to remain a bit dry I'll up 89 00:04:37,340 --> 00:04:40,550 maybe put some dark delays back there 90 00:04:40,550 --> 00:04:44,210 behind it but if if you do 91 00:04:44,210 --> 00:04:48,620 rhythmic delays with lead vocal and you 92 00:04:48,620 --> 00:04:50,930 get them so they're not heard as delays 93 00:04:50,930 --> 00:04:53,750 they tend to help the vocal glue to the 94 00:04:53,750 --> 00:04:56,090 track they make it bounce a little bit 95 00:04:56,090 --> 00:04:58,220 more they give it a little bit more life 96 00:04:58,220 --> 00:05:01,070 and rhythm and help help it sit above 97 00:05:01,070 --> 00:05:03,560 all the other instruments and tracks so 98 00:05:03,560 --> 00:05:06,470 so I'll very subtly do that kind of 99 00:05:06,470 --> 00:05:08,120 stuff and it really depends on the music 100 00:05:08,120 --> 00:05:11,060 how much it's heard how bright or how 101 00:05:11,060 --> 00:05:14,570 dark those delays are perhaps the vocal 102 00:05:14,570 --> 00:05:16,820 might need a little bit of extension a 103 00:05:16,820 --> 00:05:20,900 little bit more depth I might do some 104 00:05:20,900 --> 00:05:25,370 type of dark plate or Hall whatever's 105 00:05:25,370 --> 00:05:28,160 appropriate for the music and that 106 00:05:28,160 --> 00:05:30,200 really that I have to say the music 107 00:05:30,200 --> 00:05:32,810 really determines everything I think 108 00:05:32,810 --> 00:05:35,360 you're mostly asking about pop so with 109 00:05:35,360 --> 00:05:38,510 pop the delays can be brighter the 110 00:05:38,510 --> 00:05:42,080 reverb zeni chorusing effect you might 111 00:05:42,080 --> 00:05:44,540 use sometimes even a little bit of flan 112 00:05:44,540 --> 00:05:48,800 gene helps get the vocal to to be a 113 00:05:48,800 --> 00:05:51,320 little bit more exciting and they can be 114 00:05:51,320 --> 00:05:53,360 brighter and pop music that they can be 115 00:05:53,360 --> 00:05:55,880 perhaps in rock or even rap music for 116 00:05:55,880 --> 00:05:57,620 that matter hope that answers your 117 00:05:57,620 --> 00:05:59,940 question 118 00:05:59,950 --> 00:06:05,180 Mao is asking what effects in popular 119 00:06:05,180 --> 00:06:07,760 music have surprised me lately when I 120 00:06:07,760 --> 00:06:10,520 listen to the radio I think the one 121 00:06:10,520 --> 00:06:12,980 thing that's that's pretty funny to me 122 00:06:12,980 --> 00:06:17,690 is how it's cool again to use reverb 123 00:06:17,690 --> 00:06:22,670 whether its natural or artificial having 124 00:06:22,670 --> 00:06:25,820 grown up in the 90s and made records in 125 00:06:25,820 --> 00:06:29,780 the 90s it was not cool to use reverb 126 00:06:29,780 --> 00:06:33,230 those were dry times you were you were 127 00:06:33,230 --> 00:06:35,390 fired as an engineer if you tried to 128 00:06:35,390 --> 00:06:38,200 sneak some reverb in a rock bands mix 129 00:06:38,200 --> 00:06:42,470 dry was in even in in bigger pop records 130 00:06:42,470 --> 00:06:44,780 that you'll go back in time and they're 131 00:06:44,780 --> 00:06:47,170 definitely drier and I 132 00:06:47,170 --> 00:06:50,080 so now everybody's using reverb and it's 133 00:06:50,080 --> 00:06:51,580 cool and it's okay 134 00:06:51,580 --> 00:06:55,540 and you'll hear big giant reverberant 135 00:06:55,540 --> 00:06:59,110 records on grizzly bear and even even 136 00:06:59,110 --> 00:07:01,450 adele for that matter isn't afraid of 137 00:07:01,450 --> 00:07:05,290 using reverb so it's kind of funny to me 138 00:07:05,290 --> 00:07:08,440 how trends of effects happen and they 139 00:07:08,440 --> 00:07:11,170 come and go and you know years ago in 140 00:07:11,170 --> 00:07:14,020 the 80s everything was very processed 141 00:07:14,020 --> 00:07:17,260 and lots of delays and and unfortunately 142 00:07:17,260 --> 00:07:19,419 when you hear that music now it sounds 143 00:07:19,419 --> 00:07:22,450 very dated so I don't know let's see in 144 00:07:22,450 --> 00:07:26,140 ten years if if things sound like 2013 145 00:07:26,140 --> 00:07:30,490 we'll find out okay next question 146 00:07:30,490 --> 00:07:34,480 Ricky Tara Ferreira asks what are your 147 00:07:34,480 --> 00:07:36,970 methods of layering different vocals in 148 00:07:36,970 --> 00:07:39,640 a track that's good question there's a 149 00:07:39,640 --> 00:07:42,220 lot of different ways to do it 150 00:07:42,220 --> 00:07:44,290 I'm assuming Ricky that you're talking 151 00:07:44,290 --> 00:07:46,810 about actually recording them and if 152 00:07:46,810 --> 00:07:49,690 that's the case I'll tell you one or two 153 00:07:49,690 --> 00:07:52,240 things that I often do 154 00:07:52,240 --> 00:07:55,030 perhaps if I'm doing a lead vocal then 155 00:07:55,030 --> 00:07:58,479 doubling it often I'll do the double on 156 00:07:58,479 --> 00:08:01,930 a different microphone perhaps I'll look 157 00:08:01,930 --> 00:08:04,750 for sound for the double that will 158 00:08:04,750 --> 00:08:07,240 complement the lead vocal in other words 159 00:08:07,240 --> 00:08:09,580 if the lead vocal is very bright I might 160 00:08:09,580 --> 00:08:12,010 look for the double to be very dull and 161 00:08:12,010 --> 00:08:14,400 I'll do the same with background vocals 162 00:08:14,400 --> 00:08:18,729 perhaps if I'm doing stereo background 163 00:08:18,729 --> 00:08:21,400 vocals I might do one where the singer 164 00:08:21,400 --> 00:08:23,650 is very close on the mic and one when 165 00:08:23,650 --> 00:08:26,650 they're further away especially if I'm 166 00:08:26,650 --> 00:08:30,940 doing especially if I'm doing gang 167 00:08:30,940 --> 00:08:33,820 vocals where you might do three four 168 00:08:33,820 --> 00:08:37,150 passes of group background vocals I'll 169 00:08:37,150 --> 00:08:40,200 always make sure that they are each at 170 00:08:40,200 --> 00:08:42,969 different positions in the room I'll 171 00:08:42,969 --> 00:08:45,820 switch the singers around move them 172 00:08:45,820 --> 00:08:48,370 further back off the mics anything to 173 00:08:48,370 --> 00:08:50,560 get a little bit more depth and bigness 174 00:08:50,560 --> 00:08:53,920 in the sound so it's not the exact same 175 00:08:53,920 --> 00:08:57,250 vocal sound on top of the exact same 176 00:08:57,250 --> 00:09:00,130 vocal sound I make sure that 177 00:09:00,130 --> 00:09:03,130 each track even if it's via compression 178 00:09:03,130 --> 00:09:06,760 or equalization or microphone placement 179 00:09:06,760 --> 00:09:09,400 I make sure everything's just a little 180 00:09:09,400 --> 00:09:10,930 different because I think they add up to 181 00:09:10,930 --> 00:09:13,450 a much bigger sound that way 182 00:09:13,450 --> 00:09:18,100 hope that helps question from Andrew 183 00:09:18,100 --> 00:09:22,780 Pettit Andrew asks mixing in analog or 184 00:09:22,780 --> 00:09:26,470 mixing in the box or hybrid mixing I'm 185 00:09:26,470 --> 00:09:29,200 assuming he means via summing and some 186 00:09:29,200 --> 00:09:33,640 console which do you prefer and why well 187 00:09:33,640 --> 00:09:38,350 I grew up with analog tape and mixing on 188 00:09:38,350 --> 00:09:40,570 analog consoles so that's the most 189 00:09:40,570 --> 00:09:44,250 familiar to me I'm the most fluid at it 190 00:09:44,250 --> 00:09:47,740 it's sort of part of my being so that 191 00:09:47,740 --> 00:09:49,980 would probably be the easiest and most 192 00:09:49,980 --> 00:09:52,690 favorite way for me however there are 193 00:09:52,690 --> 00:09:55,440 obvious advantages of mixing in the Box 194 00:09:55,440 --> 00:09:59,140 primarily recall these days 195 00:09:59,140 --> 00:10:01,600 record companies want multiple different 196 00:10:01,600 --> 00:10:05,470 versions of songs for an hour approval 197 00:10:05,470 --> 00:10:09,040 manager approval European market versus 198 00:10:09,040 --> 00:10:12,160 Asian market so having the ability to 199 00:10:12,160 --> 00:10:16,000 quickly recall mixes is a fantastic 200 00:10:16,000 --> 00:10:20,230 thing hybrid mixing meaning I'm sure he 201 00:10:20,230 --> 00:10:24,550 means via summing boxes where you do a 202 00:10:24,550 --> 00:10:27,610 lot of mixing in Pro Tools and then some 203 00:10:27,610 --> 00:10:29,920 through the desk is great I think it's a 204 00:10:29,920 --> 00:10:33,400 great way to get the advantages of in 205 00:10:33,400 --> 00:10:37,060 the Box mixing but to get the quality of 206 00:10:37,060 --> 00:10:41,200 an analog console so given a lot of the 207 00:10:41,200 --> 00:10:43,020 needs of things these days 208 00:10:43,020 --> 00:10:47,040 hybrid mixing can be the best way to go 209 00:10:47,040 --> 00:10:49,870 the good thing about analog mixing is 210 00:10:49,870 --> 00:10:54,220 that usually every time you recall it 211 00:10:54,220 --> 00:10:56,500 it's a little bit different so it's 212 00:10:56,500 --> 00:10:58,990 almost like a painter he's never going 213 00:10:58,990 --> 00:11:01,780 to paint the same mix twice so sometimes 214 00:11:01,780 --> 00:11:03,220 you come up with things that you 215 00:11:03,220 --> 00:11:06,010 actually beat the original and are 216 00:11:06,010 --> 00:11:09,070 indeed better where sometimes when 217 00:11:09,070 --> 00:11:10,900 you're in the box I find that you just 218 00:11:10,900 --> 00:11:13,270 repeat yourself maybe you turn that 219 00:11:13,270 --> 00:11:13,870 guitar up 220 00:11:13,870 --> 00:11:16,240 a little bit but ultimately it's it's 221 00:11:16,240 --> 00:11:18,580 the same mix so they both have their 222 00:11:18,580 --> 00:11:22,380 advantages hope that answer isn't Andrew 223 00:11:22,380 --> 00:11:26,470 okay Andrew Gentilly asks a very tricky 224 00:11:26,470 --> 00:11:29,650 question here yes what my position is on 225 00:11:29,650 --> 00:11:33,279 mixing loud and do I find myself mixing 226 00:11:33,279 --> 00:11:35,740 louder than I was in the past perhaps 227 00:11:35,740 --> 00:11:37,779 and they also asked an interesting 228 00:11:37,779 --> 00:11:40,510 question about mastering if it's really 229 00:11:40,510 --> 00:11:43,510 really necessary these days in the fact 230 00:11:43,510 --> 00:11:45,400 that we're not necessarily always doing 231 00:11:45,400 --> 00:11:48,430 vinyl or CD and we're delivering files 232 00:11:48,430 --> 00:11:52,960 direct to iTunes or whoever so he's 233 00:11:52,960 --> 00:11:55,990 asking if mastering is necessary my my 234 00:11:55,990 --> 00:11:59,680 feeling on on deliberately mixing loud 235 00:11:59,680 --> 00:12:04,089 and pushing digital levels and trying to 236 00:12:04,089 --> 00:12:07,450 outdo somebody else on the radio to me 237 00:12:07,450 --> 00:12:12,279 it's it's not my favorite way of working 238 00:12:12,279 --> 00:12:15,130 it's not something I believe in I think 239 00:12:15,130 --> 00:12:18,940 you make the best most musical record 240 00:12:18,940 --> 00:12:21,880 possible you don't worry about loudness 241 00:12:21,880 --> 00:12:24,339 because every single radio station is 242 00:12:24,339 --> 00:12:26,770 going to sound different and sometimes 243 00:12:26,770 --> 00:12:29,110 if you try liberabit ly to push the 244 00:12:29,110 --> 00:12:31,600 level when it finally gets out there on 245 00:12:31,600 --> 00:12:34,270 the radio the radio compressors can be 246 00:12:34,270 --> 00:12:37,750 pretty evil boxes and usually the 247 00:12:37,750 --> 00:12:40,209 loudest thing tends to get compressed 248 00:12:40,209 --> 00:12:42,910 even more so if you're compressing your 249 00:12:42,910 --> 00:12:45,510 mix is hard to make them sound loud 250 00:12:45,510 --> 00:12:47,800 chances are they're going to start to 251 00:12:47,800 --> 00:12:50,170 sound smaller compared to things that 252 00:12:50,170 --> 00:12:54,339 are more honest and organic and I also 253 00:12:54,339 --> 00:12:57,820 feel it's your your job it's your duty 254 00:12:57,820 --> 00:13:01,150 to the artist to make a record that will 255 00:13:01,150 --> 00:13:04,089 stand the test of time and even though 256 00:13:04,089 --> 00:13:06,520 over the past years 257 00:13:06,520 --> 00:13:10,240 mixing loud was a trend I think that 258 00:13:10,240 --> 00:13:12,310 artists might not want to listen to that 259 00:13:12,310 --> 00:13:14,980 record in five years or ten years time 260 00:13:14,980 --> 00:13:17,800 so I would hate to do anything that 261 00:13:17,800 --> 00:13:21,400 would compromise the artists long-term 262 00:13:21,400 --> 00:13:24,520 career so I would prefer to make a great 263 00:13:24,520 --> 00:13:25,790 sounding record and then 264 00:13:25,790 --> 00:13:28,220 worried about the levels when it comes 265 00:13:28,220 --> 00:13:29,060 to the radio 266 00:13:29,060 --> 00:13:31,640 I think mastering is really really 267 00:13:31,640 --> 00:13:33,980 necessary because everybody needs an 268 00:13:33,980 --> 00:13:36,920 objective year a band hires a producer 269 00:13:36,920 --> 00:13:39,260 because they want an objective year a 270 00:13:39,260 --> 00:13:42,200 producer needs an A&R man because he 271 00:13:42,200 --> 00:13:44,180 needs an objective year and I think the 272 00:13:44,180 --> 00:13:47,270 mastering engineer is the engineer or 273 00:13:47,270 --> 00:13:50,770 the mixers objective year and sometimes 274 00:13:50,770 --> 00:13:53,690 it's what he doesn't do to it and 275 00:13:53,690 --> 00:13:56,570 sometimes it's the things he adds to it 276 00:13:56,570 --> 00:14:00,680 so I trust my mastering engineers I give 277 00:14:00,680 --> 00:14:03,890 them a lot of freedom I I hope that they 278 00:14:03,890 --> 00:14:06,650 will look at my work and find the one 279 00:14:06,650 --> 00:14:09,830 little thing that I missed that they can 280 00:14:09,830 --> 00:14:12,140 add to it that'll help make it out 281 00:14:12,140 --> 00:14:15,710 well-rounded musical mix so I'm always 282 00:14:15,710 --> 00:14:18,230 in favor of using trusted and great 283 00:14:18,230 --> 00:14:20,060 mastering engineers I think it's 284 00:14:20,060 --> 00:14:22,250 something that no artist should ever 285 00:14:22,250 --> 00:14:26,210 skimp on okay Joel Davis this question 286 00:14:26,210 --> 00:14:29,210 is what was my approach when working 287 00:14:29,210 --> 00:14:32,060 with Jason Mraz on the song the woman I 288 00:14:32,060 --> 00:14:36,470 love interesting question Jason wanted 289 00:14:36,470 --> 00:14:39,770 to do something where we showcased great 290 00:14:39,770 --> 00:14:42,500 musicians great arrangers great 291 00:14:42,500 --> 00:14:44,930 recording and and we're really sensitive 292 00:14:44,930 --> 00:14:48,890 to the song and we all listened and 293 00:14:48,890 --> 00:14:51,200 loved to those we all listened and love 294 00:14:51,200 --> 00:14:53,500 those classic albums that were done in 295 00:14:53,500 --> 00:14:57,410 Muscle Shoals with Paul Simon and Aretha 296 00:14:57,410 --> 00:15:01,520 Franklin and dire straits where the the 297 00:15:01,520 --> 00:15:03,710 musicians were really a part of the 298 00:15:03,710 --> 00:15:06,830 record and you you heard virtuosity and 299 00:15:06,830 --> 00:15:09,440 you heard tasteful playing and it wasn't 300 00:15:09,440 --> 00:15:12,020 about layering lots of tracks it was 301 00:15:12,020 --> 00:15:15,350 really about honest organic parts and 302 00:15:15,350 --> 00:15:18,350 the chemistry of the the musicians in 303 00:15:18,350 --> 00:15:20,750 the room so with that particular song I 304 00:15:20,750 --> 00:15:22,670 can say I think we were very much 305 00:15:22,670 --> 00:15:27,950 thinking of a 70s Muscle Shoals almost 306 00:15:27,950 --> 00:15:32,570 blue-eyed soul version of the song and I 307 00:15:32,570 --> 00:15:34,880 think if there was a theme for the album 308 00:15:34,880 --> 00:15:38,120 it might be to incorporate those real 309 00:15:38,120 --> 00:15:39,230 honest 310 00:15:39,230 --> 00:15:39,680 L 311 00:15:39,680 --> 00:15:42,740 of great songwriting great singing and 312 00:15:42,740 --> 00:15:44,990 great musicianship and not a lot of 313 00:15:44,990 --> 00:15:48,430 trickery so we have a question here from 314 00:15:48,430 --> 00:15:52,640 Daniel Bruns a little tricky question 315 00:15:52,640 --> 00:15:55,339 and I might surprise him with my answer 316 00:15:55,339 --> 00:15:58,160 here he asked when I sit down to mix a 317 00:15:58,160 --> 00:16:01,640 song rock or alternative what instrument 318 00:16:01,640 --> 00:16:04,459 do I start with and they also asked what 319 00:16:04,459 --> 00:16:08,600 are some of my go-to gear or starting 320 00:16:08,600 --> 00:16:12,860 points from the mix the tricky point is 321 00:16:12,860 --> 00:16:14,959 I don't start with one instrument I 322 00:16:14,959 --> 00:16:18,459 start with everything I put the whole 323 00:16:18,459 --> 00:16:21,860 mix in I get myself a great rough 324 00:16:21,860 --> 00:16:24,890 balance before I do any compression or 325 00:16:24,890 --> 00:16:28,490 EQ or anything I put every single fader 326 00:16:28,490 --> 00:16:32,120 up make it sound like a song and then 327 00:16:32,120 --> 00:16:34,670 I'll sit back take a listen and go okay 328 00:16:34,670 --> 00:16:36,560 perhaps the drums need a little 329 00:16:36,560 --> 00:16:38,870 adjustment a bass needs to be more 330 00:16:38,870 --> 00:16:42,200 powerful drums need a little bit more 331 00:16:42,200 --> 00:16:45,500 Sparkle a little bit more snap the vocal 332 00:16:45,500 --> 00:16:47,360 needs some effects to glue it to the 333 00:16:47,360 --> 00:16:50,240 track and then I might break the mix 334 00:16:50,240 --> 00:16:52,250 down a little bit but I'm not going to 335 00:16:52,250 --> 00:16:55,010 use a solo button I'm going to maybe 336 00:16:55,010 --> 00:16:57,950 take the vocal out and start to work on 337 00:16:57,950 --> 00:16:59,870 the drums with everything else in there 338 00:16:59,870 --> 00:17:03,350 the way I look at a mix is it's a it's a 339 00:17:03,350 --> 00:17:05,959 house and you build it and build it and 340 00:17:05,959 --> 00:17:09,260 build it but you don't necessarily start 341 00:17:09,260 --> 00:17:11,270 with the second floor and expect the 342 00:17:11,270 --> 00:17:13,370 third floor is going to work with the 343 00:17:13,370 --> 00:17:17,870 foundation so I like to kind of start 344 00:17:17,870 --> 00:17:19,939 with it all together and put the pieces 345 00:17:19,939 --> 00:17:25,100 together like a painting and very rarely 346 00:17:25,100 --> 00:17:27,650 will I solo an instrument maybe I'm 347 00:17:27,650 --> 00:17:30,500 having problems with it I will because I 348 00:17:30,500 --> 00:17:32,870 think it's about how each element works 349 00:17:32,870 --> 00:17:35,660 together and not necessarily what they 350 00:17:35,660 --> 00:17:39,400 sound like unto themselves and solo so 351 00:17:39,400 --> 00:17:43,220 it's it's all about the entire mix all 352 00:17:43,220 --> 00:17:47,150 faders up and then in terms of what gear 353 00:17:47,150 --> 00:17:50,690 I go to you know I have my favorites but 354 00:17:50,690 --> 00:17:53,059 but every kind of 355 00:17:53,059 --> 00:17:55,490 very kind of music requires different 356 00:17:55,490 --> 00:17:59,419 gear Daniel's asking specifically about 357 00:17:59,419 --> 00:18:02,120 rock and alternative so if that's the 358 00:18:02,120 --> 00:18:05,710 case I would want gear that has 359 00:18:05,710 --> 00:18:10,399 character and power and attitude so I 360 00:18:10,399 --> 00:18:14,389 would certainly use API EQs Neve modules 361 00:18:14,389 --> 00:18:17,779 for low-end I would use Universal Audio 362 00:18:17,779 --> 00:18:21,850 compressors for thickness and power 363 00:18:21,850 --> 00:18:25,100 might use my Chandler compressors for 364 00:18:25,100 --> 00:18:29,119 effects I love my Chandler curve bender 365 00:18:29,119 --> 00:18:31,759 I use that on the stereo buss especially 366 00:18:31,759 --> 00:18:34,009 for rock music because just a little 367 00:18:34,009 --> 00:18:36,639 tiny bit of it really adds a lot of 368 00:18:36,639 --> 00:18:39,700 aggression and energy to the sound 369 00:18:39,700 --> 00:18:44,090 lately I'm hooked on the Clara phonic EQ 370 00:18:44,090 --> 00:18:47,809 that seems to be a beautiful EQ to use 371 00:18:47,809 --> 00:18:50,929 for the overall stereo bus even just a 372 00:18:50,929 --> 00:18:54,590 crack of it somehow helps guitar rock it 373 00:18:54,590 --> 00:18:58,669 helps the guitars and bass and organ or 374 00:18:58,669 --> 00:19:00,830 whatever's in there just come forward 375 00:19:00,830 --> 00:19:03,710 and outside the speakers so maybe the 376 00:19:03,710 --> 00:19:08,240 Clara phonic is my my new piece of gear 377 00:19:08,240 --> 00:19:12,470 for for 2013 that might be my one of my 378 00:19:12,470 --> 00:19:14,990 favorites I love my shadow hills 379 00:19:14,990 --> 00:19:19,429 compressor the listened grove compressor 380 00:19:19,429 --> 00:19:21,470 is great there's lots of good gear 381 00:19:21,470 --> 00:19:23,720 that's out there that I really truly 382 00:19:23,720 --> 00:19:27,289 love but in terms of mixing rock music 383 00:19:27,289 --> 00:19:30,159 those are some of the go-to things 384 00:19:30,159 --> 00:19:32,990 there's a question here from Ray Ketchum 385 00:19:32,990 --> 00:19:35,330 I think I know you Ray it's a funny 386 00:19:35,330 --> 00:19:38,570 question you asked basically about what 387 00:19:38,570 --> 00:19:43,909 have I discovered new in 2013 well 388 00:19:43,909 --> 00:19:46,970 certainly a lot of new music but I'm 389 00:19:46,970 --> 00:19:49,249 sure your questions about gear because 390 00:19:49,249 --> 00:19:51,139 everybody's question is usually about 391 00:19:51,139 --> 00:19:54,289 cure okay so some of my favorite pieces 392 00:19:54,289 --> 00:19:57,860 of this year have been the shadow hills 393 00:19:57,860 --> 00:20:01,119 mastering compressor the shadow hills 394 00:20:01,119 --> 00:20:06,110 you a mastering compressor plug-in a lot 395 00:20:06,110 --> 00:20:06,919 of the UA 396 00:20:06,919 --> 00:20:09,529 plugins are fantastic I used my 397 00:20:09,529 --> 00:20:11,869 satellite everywhere I go that's a 398 00:20:11,869 --> 00:20:15,470 fantastic box I like the new listen 399 00:20:15,470 --> 00:20:17,749 Grove compressor it's a sort of 400 00:20:17,749 --> 00:20:20,450 emulation of the old Altech for thirty 401 00:20:20,450 --> 00:20:23,269 Six's those are fantastic 402 00:20:23,269 --> 00:20:27,350 I used my Chandler stompboxes all the 403 00:20:27,350 --> 00:20:28,580 time 404 00:20:28,580 --> 00:20:31,039 there there guitar distortion pedals 405 00:20:31,039 --> 00:20:33,169 that just have a beautiful and unique 406 00:20:33,169 --> 00:20:38,269 tone my Clarisonic stereo EQ has become 407 00:20:38,269 --> 00:20:42,409 my go-to buss EQ it just does something 408 00:20:42,409 --> 00:20:45,440 that no other equalizer does 409 00:20:45,440 --> 00:20:49,220 oh boy in terms of microphones there's a 410 00:20:49,220 --> 00:20:52,039 lot of great things out there I was just 411 00:20:52,039 --> 00:20:54,700 able to hear the new Audio Technica 412 00:20:54,700 --> 00:20:57,350 rectangular diaphragm mic and I'm sorry 413 00:20:57,350 --> 00:20:58,730 with the numbers I've forgotten the 414 00:20:58,730 --> 00:21:02,210 number but the new Audio Technica mic is 415 00:21:02,210 --> 00:21:05,210 very very unique sounding very open and 416 00:21:05,210 --> 00:21:08,289 clear and natural and has a way of 417 00:21:08,289 --> 00:21:11,989 almost removing the glass from the wall 418 00:21:11,989 --> 00:21:14,149 the other thing I'm hooked on these days 419 00:21:14,149 --> 00:21:17,570 are the new mic pre e cues from 420 00:21:17,570 --> 00:21:21,309 undertone audio they sound unlike 421 00:21:21,309 --> 00:21:23,869 anything that you could ever hear there 422 00:21:23,869 --> 00:21:26,720 are a combination of a thick retro sound 423 00:21:26,720 --> 00:21:30,289 but a very fast modern sound they're 424 00:21:30,289 --> 00:21:32,600 very sophisticated in terms of the 425 00:21:32,600 --> 00:21:36,080 equalizer and the mic pre has a tone 426 00:21:36,080 --> 00:21:40,999 that everything sounds outside the 427 00:21:40,999 --> 00:21:43,489 speaker's everything sounds more present 428 00:21:43,489 --> 00:21:45,409 than all your other instruments there 429 00:21:45,409 --> 00:21:48,139 it's quite a unique box that Eric 430 00:21:48,139 --> 00:21:52,340 Valentine's built Peter is asking a 431 00:21:52,340 --> 00:21:55,100 question about how far do I take my 432 00:21:55,100 --> 00:21:57,590 mixes how close do I get them to the 433 00:21:57,590 --> 00:22:00,169 finished product what do I do in terms 434 00:22:00,169 --> 00:22:03,049 of compression EQ how much do I leave 435 00:22:03,049 --> 00:22:05,809 for the mastering engineer he says he's 436 00:22:05,809 --> 00:22:08,230 been disappointed in the past when he 437 00:22:08,230 --> 00:22:10,970 lets the mastering engineer do all the 438 00:22:10,970 --> 00:22:13,340 work Peter I trust my mastering 439 00:22:13,340 --> 00:22:16,279 engineers I am fortunate and I've worked 440 00:22:16,279 --> 00:22:19,489 with Bob Ludwig and Ted Jensen and Greg 441 00:22:19,489 --> 00:22:20,720 kalbi and 442 00:22:20,720 --> 00:22:23,150 Emily Lazar and Gavin Larson and some of 443 00:22:23,150 --> 00:22:25,970 the great ones and they consistently 444 00:22:25,970 --> 00:22:30,440 always do good work so I never process 445 00:22:30,440 --> 00:22:34,730 my last step of the mix too far I trust 446 00:22:34,730 --> 00:22:38,929 them I let them do their job I will do 447 00:22:38,929 --> 00:22:42,950 some stereo buss compression in EQ but I 448 00:22:42,950 --> 00:22:46,220 always do very very minimum because I 449 00:22:46,220 --> 00:22:49,450 want to preserve the dynamics but I want 450 00:22:49,450 --> 00:22:53,150 aggression and I want glue that a final 451 00:22:53,150 --> 00:22:55,900 compression will give you I don't 452 00:22:55,900 --> 00:22:59,059 finalize them normalize them anything 453 00:22:59,059 --> 00:23:01,760 eyes them I leave that to the mastering 454 00:23:01,760 --> 00:23:05,390 engineer so if I'm doing stereo buss 455 00:23:05,390 --> 00:23:09,909 compression with a Alan smart C 2 or a 456 00:23:09,909 --> 00:23:13,309 Chandler or a shadow Hills I'm only 457 00:23:13,309 --> 00:23:16,370 doing a couple of DB at the very very 458 00:23:16,370 --> 00:23:20,360 most and in terms of buss EQ if I'm 459 00:23:20,360 --> 00:23:24,530 doing any it's 1 DB on the bottom 1 DB 460 00:23:24,530 --> 00:23:27,500 on the top and that's about it I'm very 461 00:23:27,500 --> 00:23:30,620 very gentle with it and I always feel 462 00:23:30,620 --> 00:23:33,200 that a good mastering engineer is going 463 00:23:33,200 --> 00:23:36,260 to objectively hear your mix and be able 464 00:23:36,260 --> 00:23:39,440 to finalize it that's what he's there 465 00:23:39,440 --> 00:23:39,860 for 466 00:23:39,860 --> 00:23:42,110 so I would say to trust your mastering 467 00:23:42,110 --> 00:23:45,530 engineers and hopefully you have to you 468 00:23:45,530 --> 00:23:49,370 know one thing I do sorry Peter one 469 00:23:49,370 --> 00:23:52,340 thing I do is I've studied mastering 470 00:23:52,340 --> 00:23:54,650 engineers and I listened to their 471 00:23:54,650 --> 00:23:57,049 records and their sounds if you will and 472 00:23:57,049 --> 00:23:59,770 I try to choose a mastering engineer 473 00:23:59,770 --> 00:24:03,650 based on things he's done in the past in 474 00:24:03,650 --> 00:24:06,710 other words if I'm mixing a very heavy 475 00:24:06,710 --> 00:24:10,610 guitar oriented rock band one thing I'll 476 00:24:10,610 --> 00:24:13,220 do is listen to other records in that 477 00:24:13,220 --> 00:24:16,490 genre and I'll happen to see oh look at 478 00:24:16,490 --> 00:24:16,909 this 479 00:24:16,909 --> 00:24:20,270 Greg Kelby or Ted Jensen mastered all 480 00:24:20,270 --> 00:24:22,039 these records and I like the sound of 481 00:24:22,039 --> 00:24:24,140 all these records they have something in 482 00:24:24,140 --> 00:24:24,679 common 483 00:24:24,679 --> 00:24:27,740 and then I'll perhaps choose that 484 00:24:27,740 --> 00:24:30,110 mastering engineer for that kind of 485 00:24:30,110 --> 00:24:30,679 music 486 00:24:30,679 --> 00:24:34,120 perhaps if I'm doing something very warm 487 00:24:34,120 --> 00:24:38,120 organic and tasty and simple and I want 488 00:24:38,120 --> 00:24:41,000 air and openness or a jazz record 489 00:24:41,000 --> 00:24:44,000 perhaps I might see that Oh Bob Ludwig 490 00:24:44,000 --> 00:24:46,100 did all my favorite records in that 491 00:24:46,100 --> 00:24:48,710 genre so I'll choose Bob Ludwig and 492 00:24:48,710 --> 00:24:51,320 there's many many other younger 493 00:24:51,320 --> 00:24:53,330 mastering engineers that are coming up 494 00:24:53,330 --> 00:24:56,029 and doing great work so there's plenty 495 00:24:56,029 --> 00:24:58,490 of people to choose from and sorry you 496 00:24:58,490 --> 00:24:59,700 had a bad time in the past 497 00:24:59,700 --> 00:25:09,029 [Music]35742

Can't find what you're looking for?
Get subtitles in any language from opensubtitles.com, and translate them here.