Mixing and mastering in stages...or as one big lump?

[miroslav]

Just so this forum isn't showing goose eggs.

OK...so I see a lot of folks who post new songs...here and elsewhere...occasionally mention how they tracked it over the weekend...
...and then they are posting the finished product on Monday.

I remember back in my very early recordings days, I use to knock out 3-4 songs in one weekend sometimes...at least at that time, I use to think they were all done and good to go (ignorance is bliss)...but TBH, now days I take a lot more time in general.
Oh, I can usually do all my tracking in a couple of days for a song, assuming I have all the individual parts/tracks all worked out...but then it takes me some time to go through the tracks and the parts, and I may even make some production changes once the tracking is done and everything is in the computer. Granted for me these are two separate stages, since I track to tape and then dump to computer...so once it's in the computer, I may decide that I want the intro to last for 8 measures instead of 4...or something like that, and it's pretty easy to edit that kind of stuff.
I'm certainly not going to re-track everything over something like that...but I will also very often track some additional stuff, because I may be thinking about doing that...so that way I have it if I need to edit anything in, or out.

Anyway...when I'm kinda close to the finished stage of a mix...I'll put it aside, and let is sit for days, weeks, even longer...and I'll go work on other songs...which often leaves me with like a whole bunch of songs at various stages. I mean, it's been a long time where I just blew through a single song from start to finish, and then moved on to something else.

Which then bring me to the mastering question.
When I do get to my final mix...I will again let that sit, and go work on other things...and then at some later point, I will consider what, if anything, I want to do in a final "mastering" stage.
That said...I see that a lot of folks sorta "blur" all those stages into kind one process. I see people who are basically applying mixing considerations to a single track...while they still plan to record others. Likewise, I see people applying mastering to mixes that, IMO, are far from finished.

Maybe I'm just working old-school by keeping things in stages...though I do agree that once in the DAW, I apply a lot of what I call "pre mixing" tweaks before I mix...but I'm still pretty much in that 1-2-3 step mentality.

So...what do you think...that doesn't it matter...or that it should it be separated in stages. Just do it as it comes, mix/master, track by track, kick it, pull it, mold it, like so much play dough, and get to the end in that manner?
Does it make for a better process to keep things in stages?

[rammer24]

I don't know what's "better", but I do things my way, which I find works for me. I pretty much mix as I track. By the time I get to tracking vocals, which is usually last, the song is pretty much mixed.

The only time I can get a song done "over the weekend" is when I'm doing a cover. I find covers very easy because it's all already there for you. Even if you're putting your own touch on it, you're still just doing a cover. I find covers very easy, maybe because I've gigged for years playing almost every style of cover there is. I also learn a lot by doing covers. Song-writing, chord progression, mixing techniques, etc....I always learn something new by the time I've done a cover. Or at least get a few good ideas.

Originals take me a lot longer and go through many more stages and changes before they're done. Even though I say a song is pretty much mixed by the time I get to the last thing I record, that doesn't mean I still won't change a lot of things once everything's tracked. I'll make even more changes after I post it and get others' ears in on it.

I tend to do things differently than most people, anyway. For example, I track most instruments to a click (drum machine more or less programmed to what the drums will be doing), and then I record drums last, or second to last before vocals.

[miroslav]

Originals take me a lot longer and go through many more stages and changes before they're done.

.............

I tend to do things differently tham most people, anyway. For example, I track most instruments to a click (drum machine more or less programmed to what the drums will be doing), and then I record drums last, or second to last before vocals.

I'm the same way with originals...they take awhile, but I think for me, a lot of that has to do with the fact that I use the studio as my composition/pre-production tool...even as I start to track.
I don't sit there and work out every single part to the last detail before I hit REC.
As long as I have the overall song kinda worked out in my head...I'll start tracking...because I like to hear the playback, and then make changes to better fit that idea I had in my head...and often as I start to track, new production ideas surface, so then I'll adjust to that as needed.
Once I transfer the tracks to the DAW...then I'm done with that stage, though I have on a few occasions added a track or changed a track after it's in the DAW, sometimes going back and re-tracking to tape...sometimes I'll just record it direct to DAW.

Once in the DAW, I'm in that "pre-mixing" stage...where I'm tweaking things, making edits, sometimes adjusting the arrangement by removing a verse or chorus...or adding...etc....all the time I'm also tweaking the mix...so in that regard, I am doing the mix as I go along...
...but there is a point where I "formally" stop with the DAW tweaks, and then bring the tracks back out, so I can formally mix then through my console.
It's just the way I've always done it.

I then mixdown from the DAW, through the console, to my 2-track tape deck, and in real time, I'm coming out of the 2-track and recording the final stereo mix back into the DAW.

Then...I get to my mastering stage, which is more about level tweaks than anything else. I might do some light EQ/comp shit...but I'm not reworking the mix at that mastering stage. If I find myself thinking I need to really fix shit at that stage...then I just go back to the pre-console DAW stage and fix it there, where it should have been fixed.

AFA the drums....yeah, that is an odd way.
I'll use a click...but I always do the drums first....usually to 1-2 scratch tracks and the click...then, once the drums are done, I'll either turn off the click altogether or leave it on very low, since at that point, I want to follow the drums in order to lock the instruments to them.
Since the drums originally followed the click...they're as solid as the need to be.

I think there was only one time where I dropped the drums in toward the end...I think it was only because I got ahead of things, and finally when the drummer came over, he had pretty much all the tracks to play to. Of course, they were all done to a click, so the drums then also followed the click.

[Bubba]

[miroslav]

Sorry...spilled some coffee on this post...

[Greg_L]

I don't have any set way of doing things. I can, and have, knocked complete finished mixes out in one day from scratch tracks to finished product and have been very satisfied with the results. I'm also fine with taking my time and picking at something over any long span of time.

On things involving a deadline I try to get it done as fast as possible to allow time for remixes or retracking. I hate being up against a clock.

Sometimes I mix as I go, sometimes I track it all raw and mess with it later. Like I said, I have no set way of doing anything. The only thing I do consistently is track drums first.

[rammer24]

The only thing I do consistently is track drums first.

Weirdo.

[Greg_L]

Weirdo.

Ha I used to do it your way, drums last, but I found myself sometimes retracking bass or guitars to really lock it in, so I switched to drums first.

What I do now is just track a quick and dirty scratch track to drum with, and then drop in real shit after the drums.

[Bubba]

For the purposes of adding to this thread sensibly, I mix as I track, and I track drums first, wherever possible.

[JD01]

Ah, I do things a touch differently 'cos I'm using EZ Drummer.
I just lay a beat down, then record my scratch guitar and bass parts.
Then I label the track with markers all through it, intro, verse 1, bridge, chorus, solo etc. so I get those nice vertical lines down through the screen.

Then I do my proper drum track, this time making it feel more live, the way I program the drums normally leads me to generate a few more variations on the guitar ideas.

Then I re-track the bass as a keeper and re-track the guitar parts one at a time starting with the rhythm, then the leads. The way I've got my gear set up I know what level I need things to be coming in at so that things are roughly where I want them to be level wise as soon as they're tracked.

I add all my reverbs at the end.

[jonny deep]

For the purposes of adding to this thread sensibly, I mix as I track, and I track drums first, wherever possible.

Oh, I mix as I track. I thought I was doing it wrong, but I've always found I can't tell if a recording is good enough (for my purposes & standard ) until it's mixed. I guess that comes with experience.

[Minerman]

I had a big, long post typed out last night then said fuck it, this doesn't need a 2-page explanation on how I've came to be where I'm at currently...

Long story short, I started with tweaked midi loops, went to a combination of those & Jamstix for quite a while, now I've moved to actually playing the e-kit...My point is I think the drums need to be done first, so the other instruments are recorded to them...