Instrument Separation in Mixing: Get Clarity and Punch

WEBVTT
00:00:14.819 --> 00:00:22.920
Hello, and welcome to another episode of Inside the Recording Studio.
00:00:23.240 --> 00:00:27.020
I am Jody Whitesides, and with me as always is Mr. Chris Hellstrom.
00:00:27.380 --> 00:00:28.820
How are you today, Chris?
00:00:29.320 --> 00:00:33.980
I'm doing good. I'm doing good Jody. How about yourself? You sounded very energetic there
00:00:33.620 --> 00:00:37.040
I'm feeling energetic, so why shouldn't I sound it?
00:00:36.960 --> 00:00:42.380
Good I got nothing funny to say to that so good for you man good for you. You having a good week
00:00:40.000 --> 00:00:40.960
Okay, yeah.
00:00:42.780 --> 00:00:43.880
So far so good.
00:00:44.240 --> 00:00:47.900
Tomorrow I end up dropping a lot of money that I don't want to drop, but it'll be for
00:00:47.960 --> 00:00:48.660
good stuff, so.
00:00:49.480 --> 00:00:51.300
Aside from that, life is good.
00:00:49.500 --> 00:00:54.980
All right, there you go cool like to hear it awesome. What are we yapping about today?
00:00:53.200 --> 00:00:53.680
Yes.
00:00:53.680 --> 00:00:53.840
Yes.
00:00:55.340 --> 00:01:01.640
We're talking about separation in a mix and not from a significant other, although one
00:00:56.360 --> 00:00:56.800
Yeah.
00:01:00.580 --> 00:01:00.920
Yeah.
00:01:01.700 --> 00:01:03.780
instrument could be a significant other to another.
00:01:04.320 --> 00:01:09.020
And that regard, it could be separation of significant others in a mix, of course.
00:01:09.000 --> 00:01:15.800
It could be. And it could also be if you spend too much time mixing, you might get a separation of a significant other in your real life as well.
00:01:10.100 --> 00:01:10.200
Yes.
00:01:15.940 --> 00:01:17.420
But, yeah.
00:01:16.080 --> 00:01:16.520
This is true.
00:01:16.940 --> 00:01:18.900
It has happened more than once to me.
00:01:19.100 --> 00:01:19.520
So shit.
00:01:20.000 --> 00:01:37.520
Yeah, relationship advice from two engineers. Yeah. No, we're talking about separation in a mix, obviously. And I suppose we should define first what we see as
definition of separation. So I'll start with you. When you say separation in a mix, what does that mean to you?
00:01:22.399 --> 00:01:23.280
[laughter]
00:01:37.820 --> 00:01:44.480
When two sounds are distinctly heard in a song or an audio file of some sort,
00:01:45.160 --> 00:01:52.040
that I can tell it's two distinct pieces parts, whether it's two different instruments playing
00:01:52.040 --> 00:01:57.400
the same melodic thing or two different instruments playing two different melodic things, but they're
00:01:57.440 --> 00:02:02.500
not in the same realm where they're stepping all over each other in such a way that I can't tell
00:02:02.520 --> 00:02:05.060
What is what that's separation to me
00:02:04.500 --> 00:02:11.360
Yeah, yeah, I share a similar view. I think to me separation is when I can, at least if
00:02:11.370 --> 00:02:16.840
I focus on it, if it's a dense mix, if you will, or at least a busy mix, that I can pick
00:02:16.840 --> 00:02:22.760
out individual parts and it's not just a giant wall of sound. So you know I hear
00:02:22.960 --> 00:02:27.840
Arke, I hear the casue and I hear the tambourine and I you know I can pick out
00:02:27.840 --> 00:02:34.200
the bass and this is percussion part and everything kind of has obviously but
00:02:31.520 --> 00:02:32.820
Well, don't forget the accordion.
00:02:34.440 --> 00:02:38.080
that's what it's to me. Separation in the mix is where I can clearly hear
00:02:38.220 --> 00:02:42.739
everything and you know where everything is placed and even if it requires that I
00:02:42.740 --> 00:02:46.820
focus on it somewhat. But I can pick out elements of the mix.
00:02:44.180 --> 00:02:44.580
Yes.
00:02:46.920 --> 00:02:52.680
That's what it means to me. Alright, cool. Cool. So is this
00:02:48.100 --> 00:02:50.580
Well, I'm in agreement with you. It means the same to me.
00:02:52.920 --> 00:02:55.880
always a good thing? I mean, should we always strive for
00:02:55.920 --> 00:03:02.300
this? Or is this sometimes not a requirement? That's the long
00:02:59.040 --> 00:03:00.740
The long answer is no.
00:03:01.200 --> 00:03:02.140
You want it to be longer?
00:03:03.620 --> 00:03:12.720
that would that would probably be the shortest answer ever. But
00:03:08.799 --> 00:03:12.480
The long answer is no, it's not always the desired result.
00:03:12.720 --> 00:03:13.460
Right, of course.
00:03:13.840 --> 00:03:13.920
Right?
00:03:14.000 --> 00:03:16.100
Not everything is treated equally.
00:03:16.460 --> 00:03:22.100
And sometimes it's appropriate to have perhaps a, not necessarily bit.
00:03:21.520 --> 00:03:22.300
It's mishmash.
00:03:22.480 --> 00:03:25.940
Yes, that's a much better phrase than I was going to come up with.
00:03:26.140 --> 00:03:28.020
But yeah, because sometimes that's appropriate.
00:03:29.120 --> 00:03:32.560
So just striving for definition, I think is style dependent.
00:03:32.940 --> 00:03:33.620
Ding, ding, ding, ding.
00:03:33.380 --> 00:03:39.240
I don't know if I would go so far as saying style dependent as it would be artist dependent
00:03:34.440 --> 00:03:48.000
it all. Yeah, and I guess we can even bring it down to more song dependent as well, because
00:03:39.460 --> 00:03:42.860
on how they want to hear their song.
00:03:48.140 --> 00:03:54.120
you as an artist, you might want to make different artistic statements depending on perhaps where
00:03:54.120 --> 00:03:56.580
you're at at the moment if you're looking for something?
00:03:55.360 --> 00:03:56.700
What era are you in?
00:03:56.700 --> 00:03:58.060
Are you in the 70s or something?
00:03:58.520 --> 00:04:03.160
No, the reason why I ask that is because today, a lot of times, especially with artists that
00:03:59.100 --> 00:03:59.240
Sure.
00:04:03.160 --> 00:04:08.219
are signed to labels, they don't have that artistic freedom of going in a variety of
00:04:08.220 --> 00:04:12.540
different directions. Usually they come upon a sound, they define that sound, that's it,
00:04:12.660 --> 00:04:14.420
that's what they do, and they do nothing more.
00:04:15.160 --> 00:04:15.680
That's true.
00:04:15.950 --> 00:04:19.459
That is a perhaps unfortunate reality.
00:04:19.660 --> 00:04:23.440
I think the flip side of that could be like you sort of find your voice and then you stick
00:04:23.440 --> 00:04:29.360
to that. But if you go back a few decades, that was not always the case, right? You look
00:04:28.580 --> 00:04:28.980
Exactly.
00:04:29.560 --> 00:04:35.180
at bands like Queen or even Prince or certainly somebody like Bowie, where it's like talking
00:04:34.660 --> 00:04:34.860
Hmm.
00:04:35.300 --> 00:04:38.940
about Chameleons, right? And changing their sounds. That's over a little bit more of a
00:04:36.580 --> 00:04:37.680
Sure, kiss.
00:04:39.880 --> 00:04:50.180
kiss. Did you say kiss? Yeah. Yes, right. Now, to me, when we're talking about here, you know,
00:04:40.840 --> 00:04:41.560
Yeah, I did.
00:04:44.700 --> 00:04:46.940
And arguing it could be made, but I won't make it.
00:04:50.180 --> 00:04:55.100
separation in the mix of being style dependent. I think that's very much on what is happening
00:04:55.490 --> 00:05:02.840
to you as an artist at this moment. If you're focused on a little bit more of a high fidelity
00:04:58.520 --> 00:04:58.700
Sure.
00:05:03.180 --> 00:05:09.920
type of a sound, you're probably striving for that. If you are going for, let's say like an
00:05:10.100 --> 00:05:19.620
early punk mix or you're going for hardcore style or even some grungier or even in the hip hop world
00:05:15.800 --> 00:05:16.060
Grunge.
00:05:19.620 --> 00:05:23.840
I suppose, where there's more of perhaps like an aggressive kind of sound.
00:05:24.160 --> 00:05:27.220
You might not want it to be pretty, you know, not...
00:05:26.400 --> 00:05:31.420
Well, no, and it doesn't necessarily have to be pretty or aggressive to either want separation
00:05:31.700 --> 00:05:32.100
or not.
00:05:32.360 --> 00:05:33.300
You can think of emo.
00:05:33.800 --> 00:05:36.980
There's not a lot of separation in that, depending on the artist.
00:05:34.039 --> 00:05:34.520
Yeah.
00:05:37.540 --> 00:05:39.760
We'd have to decide that first if that's indeed the goal.
00:05:39.940 --> 00:05:44.880
And if you are the mix engineer, this is obviously a discussion you have with the artist.
00:05:45.260 --> 00:05:46.860
Like what's your vision for this record?
00:05:47.020 --> 00:05:48.040
What is it that you want?
00:05:48.400 --> 00:05:48.500
Yes.
00:05:48.420 --> 00:05:58.260
You know, how are some ways that we can create this with your first thought is like, well, when I'm thinking about separation, what's your first idea on that?
00:05:58.559 --> 00:05:59.520
The arrangement of the parts.
00:05:59.960 --> 00:06:00.160
Yeah.
00:06:00.680 --> 00:06:04.080
That's the absolute first thing is the arrangement of the parts.
00:06:04.420 --> 00:06:07.000
You want separation, you have to learn arranging.
00:06:04.680 --> 00:06:05.180
Yeah, no, I
00:06:07.560 --> 00:06:09.120
That's as simple as it gets.
00:06:07.640 --> 00:06:08.080
This is true.
00:06:09.820 --> 00:06:15.880
Yeah, and we've talked about that in older episodes here, but just the idea of shoehorning
00:06:16.000 --> 00:06:21.360
everything into the mix when you're or into the song rather, when you are creating it,
00:06:21.710 --> 00:06:26.640
just because you feel, oh, this would be a cool idea here. Here's a still nice response melody to
00:06:26.700 --> 00:06:32.320
this. And at the same time, we're going to have this Tom Phil going on. And then underneath that,
00:06:32.480 --> 00:06:37.820
there's a loop going on. That's going to add a nice syncopation to that. Well, that might be too
00:06:37.820 --> 00:06:46.800
much and you have to be selective there and some. I, yes, I agree. I same thing here and
00:06:39.039 --> 00:06:41.560
You're describing the way I grew up trying to record.
00:06:46.900 --> 00:06:50.400
just, oh, I had a good idea. I have to use it. No, you don't. You know, that there'll
00:06:50.410 --> 00:06:55.420
be more good ideas. So being a little selective in creating peaks and valleys, I would say,
00:06:55.660 --> 00:07:08.960
perhaps in quote of the week there. That's some wisdom from Mr. White Sides. Everyone's
00:06:55.860 --> 00:07:00.839
Maybe a better way to say it is, "A great idea is to not use everything."
00:07:00.840 --> 00:07:07.800
Oh, I drop it once in a while.
00:07:08.980 --> 00:07:20.060
White Sides wisdom. Hashtag White Sides wisdom. Assuming that we have a decent arrangement
00:07:10.300 --> 00:07:10.880
Uh-oh.
00:07:12.800 --> 00:07:13.040
Right.
00:07:13.940 --> 00:07:17.440
What else can be a way to kind of create separation in a mix, Chris?
00:07:20.460 --> 00:07:25.640
to work with, the simplest tools that we have available to us is volume and panning. It
00:07:25.640 --> 00:07:31.920
start with volume, right? And not everything has to be at the same volume through the entire track.
00:07:26.800 --> 00:07:27.100
Right.
00:07:31.400 --> 00:07:36.580
Oh, Pasha, I love everything being at the same volume, don't you?
00:07:32.720 --> 00:07:42.560
So, absolutely, unity gain and then just compress it and have the compressor mix it for you, right?
00:07:41.599 --> 00:07:42.520
Right.
00:07:44.460 --> 00:07:50.440
But all joking aside, it's easy to dismiss something that's such a simple tool as having
00:07:44.640 --> 00:07:45.940
Joking of course.
00:07:50.440 --> 00:07:56.340
volume automation. And I think it can come down to just sort of like lazy mixing, right, where,
00:07:51.020 --> 00:07:51.940
Yep.
00:07:57.180 --> 00:08:01.660
you know, you might have, let's say that there is an acoustic guitar that is present through the
00:08:01.720 --> 00:08:07.580
entire song, for example. But maybe when it comes into the verses, it comes down a couple of dB to
00:08:07.640 --> 00:08:20.420
kind of give room for the vocal a little bit more or whatever. So little things like that. Automating
00:08:10.440 --> 00:08:12.680
Well, that's what studio interns are for.
00:08:14.020 --> 00:08:14.560
Yes.
00:08:15.660 --> 00:08:20.140
I mean, that's what studio interns were for when everything was done on console and nothing
00:08:20.260 --> 00:08:21.180
was actually automated.
00:08:21.380 --> 00:08:26.300
You had to have everybody in synchronicity doing things on the console at given times
00:08:26.480 --> 00:08:26.960
in the mix.
00:08:27.560 --> 00:08:35.340
Yeah, it was all, all, yeah, all hands on deck, live mixdown, right?
00:08:27.900 --> 00:08:32.620
Most often it was for volume rides and such and everybody had to work in unison, so to
00:08:32.760 --> 00:08:32.880
speak.
00:08:33.880 --> 00:08:34.659
All hands on deck.
00:08:35.460 --> 00:08:36.380
All hands on console.
00:08:35.580 --> 00:08:35.680
Yeah.
00:08:37.099 --> 00:08:38.320
We've moved past that now though.
00:08:37.280 --> 00:08:41.140
Do you, yeah, and I think everybody's happier for it, right?
00:08:40.700 --> 00:08:41.180
Sure.
00:08:41.479 --> 00:08:42.500
Because now it's repeatable.
00:08:43.060 --> 00:08:43.760
This is true.
00:08:44.039 --> 00:08:46.800
Yeah, do the recall and go, oh, we got to try that again.
00:08:46.740 --> 00:08:47.220
Right.
00:08:47.940 --> 00:08:53.180
There's a wonderful story somewhere about a Lang production that makes down, and this
00:08:53.260 --> 00:09:02.340
is again pre-automation where somebody would sit with a 32 band EQ, graphic EQ, and their
00:09:02.380 --> 00:09:07.580
lap during mix down and mix the vocals and accenting certain frequencies to bring out
00:09:07.640 --> 00:09:09.400
certain syllables and all this kind of stuff.
00:09:09.740 --> 00:09:10.040
Wow.
00:09:10.760 --> 00:09:11.880
Yeah, that's pretty crazy.
00:09:12.160 --> 00:09:13.480
It is, but that's mutt.
00:09:12.260 --> 00:09:15.340
So when we're talking about, yes, there we go, that's much.
00:09:15.500 --> 00:09:20.220
So today with the tools that we have for just simple volume automation, we have no reason
00:09:20.360 --> 00:09:22.000
not to use it or to complain.
00:09:22.300 --> 00:09:22.940
So that's volume.
00:09:23.100 --> 00:09:25.260
Another big one is obviously panning, right?
00:09:25.400 --> 00:09:28.500
Where in the stereo field are we sitting?
00:09:28.640 --> 00:09:29.240
Yes.
00:09:30.020 --> 00:09:34.340
That's something that you and I, again, have talked about before, but do you have perhaps
00:09:34.520 --> 00:09:38.920
a philosophy of how you like to pan stuff or how do you usually go about that?
00:09:38.920 --> 00:09:46.000
I know this song will dictate but what's your
00:09:41.100 --> 00:09:44.800
Generally speaking, the song will dictate, but there are kind of two schools of thought
00:09:44.920 --> 00:09:45.120
here.
00:09:46.240 --> 00:09:51.440
And the first school of thought is the mix engineers that believe you have center, left
00:09:51.620 --> 00:09:52.040
and right.
00:09:52.280 --> 00:09:53.300
That's it, nothing in between.
00:09:53.560 --> 00:09:53.780
yeah
00:09:54.180 --> 00:09:54.980
I'm not one of those.
00:09:55.740 --> 00:10:00.660
The other school of thought is you have left, right, and everything else in between.
00:10:01.080 --> 00:10:01.380
right
00:10:01.700 --> 00:10:07.200
For me, I like to use the entire spectrum and I do it kind of judiciously based on whatever
00:10:07.380 --> 00:10:11.880
the material is and what part of the song it is as well.
00:10:11.360 --> 00:10:17.420
Yeah. Yes, I agree with all of that. I think that there's a lot of missed opportunity,
00:10:17.800 --> 00:10:24.260
perhaps if we don't use the entire space. Now, I choose parts relative to the importance
00:10:24.520 --> 00:10:30.780
of what they are. Right? Now, there are things like kick snare and lead vocal will always
00:10:30.179 --> 00:10:32.980
Well, sure.
00:10:30.860 --> 00:10:35.939
be right up the middle for me. And but then there are other things that can be moving
00:10:35.940 --> 00:10:40.160
around a little bit perhaps. Let's say that you have a percussion part. Does that need
00:10:40.240 --> 00:10:44.880
to be hard left or hard right? No, that to me can live somewhere in between, right? Just
00:10:44.920 --> 00:10:48.620
where it's appropriate. And if you're doing that kind of thing, let's say that it's a
00:10:48.640 --> 00:10:54.720
tambourine part. One thing that I try to make use of is be aware of where if there is quote
00:10:54.840 --> 00:11:00.699
unquote real drums on it, or just even drums with a hi hat part, make sure you're not clashing
00:11:00.700 --> 00:11:06.280
with that, right? So maybe put that off to a side in the opposite direction of a hi-hat
00:11:03.200 --> 00:11:03.680
ymd
00:11:06.480 --> 00:11:09.580
thing to kind of make sure that you get a little bit of a separation there as well.
00:11:09.920 --> 00:11:10.000
Sure.
00:11:10.220 --> 00:11:18.440
But I like to take up that whole space as well. Yeah, yeah, indeed. Now, it's interesting
00:11:13.080 --> 00:11:14.460
It's all there for the use.
00:11:15.000 --> 00:11:15.800
Why not use it?
00:11:18.560 --> 00:11:24.600
when we listen to some older records with this where, let's say Van Halen, for example,
00:11:24.980 --> 00:11:30.160
like the early Van Halen albums, you have guitar in one speaker and you got bass in the other.
00:11:30.580 --> 00:11:35.460
And that can give a very sort of like off kilter, hard to get more separation than that, right?
00:11:35.139 --> 00:11:36.920
Are you sure?
00:11:36.879 --> 00:11:42.920
But yeah, you don't need to move moving into like, at most for more separation than that, I think.
00:11:41.920 --> 00:11:43.320
Sure.
00:11:43.060 --> 00:11:50.380
But sometimes if you get a little bit too aggressive, I guess with a panning, you can just lose a little bit of impact, I suppose.
00:11:50.940 --> 00:11:58.240
Well, to me, the concept of left right center in terms of pan locations is more definitive
00:11:56.880 --> 00:11:57.180
Mm-hmm.
00:11:58.520 --> 00:12:03.860
of mono and AM radio and things that are of a single speaker situation.
00:12:04.900 --> 00:12:09.100
That is my concept behind it because that gets you that separation that needs to happen
00:12:09.100 --> 00:12:11.720
in terms of making things fold down to mono really well.
00:12:12.780 --> 00:12:17.160
can still fold down to mono really well, even without going for the hard left
00:12:17.300 --> 00:12:21.840
right center type of panning. It really depends upon the mix engineer and how
00:12:21.840 --> 00:12:26.440
they like to approach dealing with their situation. Now stretching the panning
00:12:24.820 --> 00:12:25.000
Yeah.
00:12:26.460 --> 00:12:30.300
thing you hinted at it a little bit. There's also Dolby Atmos now which gives
00:12:30.420 --> 00:12:37.160
you a 3D field in which to place things. That in and of itself with a standard
00:12:32.759 --> 00:12:34.160
Yeah.
00:12:34.160 --> 00:12:34.300
Yeah.
00:12:37.320 --> 00:12:42.099
band setup could be very disorienting. It doesn't necessarily mean that it would
00:12:39.699 --> 00:12:40.460
It can be yes.
00:12:42.100 --> 00:12:49.620
be but it can be. And the idea there is that maybe it's not always ideal to put kick in
00:12:49.860 --> 00:12:57.100
the rear center or something of that nature and then throw the toms in the left right
00:12:57.260 --> 00:13:02.540
front center type thing and then stick them up on the ceiling speakers or something. You
00:13:02.580 --> 00:13:05.540
You could do it, but it might sound really bizarre on a drum kit.
00:13:05.660 --> 00:13:05.980
Who knows?
00:13:06.920 --> 00:13:11.880
Yeah, that's something we kind of hinted at in the Dolby Atmos episode as well.
00:13:07.400 --> 00:13:08.000
So...
00:13:12.220 --> 00:13:12.340
Yes.
00:13:12.420 --> 00:13:17.740
And I think just the thought there of perhaps being a little too clever for your own good,
00:13:18.070 --> 00:13:21.620
you know, and just because you can do something doesn't mean that it's a good idea.
00:13:21.460 --> 00:13:22.060
Right.
00:13:22.220 --> 00:13:29.000
And I think that can also translate into just standard sort of stereo mixing where just
00:13:24.490 --> 00:13:24.640
Okay.
00:13:26.700 --> 00:13:27.300
Okay.
00:13:29.100 --> 00:13:36.700
because you can automate the bass to travel left to right in a dotted quarter note fashion,
00:13:31.750 --> 00:13:31.900
Okay.
00:13:36.860 --> 00:13:37.160
[laughs]
00:13:36.900 --> 00:13:39.300
it might not mean that that's a good idea, right?
00:13:39.580 --> 00:13:41.860
unless you're trying to get your listener seasick, you know.
00:13:42.120 --> 00:13:46.220
Well, and now you're kind of bringing up another concept of how to create separation and mix,
00:13:46.260 --> 00:13:52.380
and that is keeping certain frequencies in check, and by putting them in certain spots,
00:13:49.700 --> 00:13:50.140
Yeah.
00:13:52.560 --> 00:13:54.920
so to speak, in relation to other instruments.
00:13:55.320 --> 00:14:00.900
And, well, it's one instrument related to another, and the frequencies that you choose to accept
00:14:00.900 --> 00:14:02.100
or put into the mix.
00:14:02.160 --> 00:14:04.500
So that's, I mean, a common one there is,
00:14:05.280 --> 00:14:10.660
we all talk about is we like to have kick and bass right down the middle.
00:14:11.240 --> 00:14:13.180
There's a lot of overlapping frequencies there.
00:14:14.060 --> 00:14:16.460
We have to choose what's going to get priority.
00:14:17.000 --> 00:14:19.780
One thing I like to say, a mix is not a democracy.
00:14:20.520 --> 00:14:20.720
All right.
00:14:20.800 --> 00:14:22.520
So not everything gets equal say.
00:14:22.660 --> 00:14:26.100
So you have to choose what's going to be the most important part for the song
00:14:26.180 --> 00:14:26.940
that you're working on.
00:14:28.140 --> 00:14:31.900
Now for a word from our sponsor, and when we come back, we'll be talking about the actual
00:14:32.100 --> 00:14:35.180
EQing and such of keeping things separated in a mix.
00:14:38.320 --> 00:14:39.140
And we're back.
00:14:39.310 --> 00:14:43.720
All right, we're going to talk about how we use some EQ to help separate things in a mix.
00:14:44.060 --> 00:14:48.620
And I mean, if we take that example again, where it's an obvious one, right, with the
00:14:48.680 --> 00:14:52.840
kick and the bass, again, a lot of overlapping frequencies there.
00:14:53.000 --> 00:14:59.960
So if we choose to have the kick to be most prominent, where the fundamental of the kick
00:15:00.120 --> 00:15:04.280
might lie somewhere, let's say it's around 60 cycles or something.
00:15:04.700 --> 00:15:09.340
And if the bass is taking up the same space there, maybe we need to carve out a little
00:15:09.340 --> 00:15:14.840
bit of that or use side chaining as I, but you might have to just like notch out a little
00:15:14.840 --> 00:15:20.540
bit of frequencies there, not completely remove them because you don't want to alter the sound
00:15:17.000 --> 00:15:18.400
ᗒ�
00:15:20.580 --> 00:15:21.640
of the instrument too much.
00:15:22.480 --> 00:15:26.120
just to create a little bit of extra space for the kick. Is there anything else that
00:15:26.130 --> 00:15:29.480
you'd like to do with EQ on the low end there?
00:15:29.800 --> 00:15:31.700
There's a lot of different things I like to do.
00:15:31.339 --> 00:15:32.740
Yeah.
00:15:32.320 --> 00:15:40.700
And one of the things that I like to do is check out the push and pull value of a kick
00:15:41.220 --> 00:15:41.700
and a bass.
00:15:42.440 --> 00:15:49.540
The kick drum has a negative start value on its sound wave and the bass has a positive
00:15:50.320 --> 00:15:50.980
start value.
00:15:51.320 --> 00:15:56.180
Now, all of a sudden, you've got competing things going on with how they're going to
00:15:56.480 --> 00:15:57.200
layer together.
00:15:57.480 --> 00:15:58.060
Right
00:15:57.540 --> 00:16:01.560
Because if the kick is pulling the speaker in and the bass is trying to punch it out,
00:16:01.830 --> 00:16:06.920
you're going to get a problem where you're losing value altogether because it causes
00:16:06.920 --> 00:16:12.360
the speaker to kind of stay center in its movement, which kind of silences the sound.
00:16:10.279 --> 00:16:10.860
Right
00:16:12.360 --> 00:16:14.700
It's almost as if it's nulling itself out.
00:16:14.880 --> 00:16:15.920
It's
00:16:15.220 --> 00:16:19.560
If there's a specific issue where the kick and the bass are really not gelling well at
00:16:19.620 --> 00:16:23.660
all, I'm going to check the value of which way they're going when they're doing their
00:16:20.440 --> 00:16:21.300
Right
00:16:23.680 --> 00:16:24.440
initial hits.
00:16:24.560 --> 00:16:31.220
So you're essentially describing like phasing here really between different instruments where the same frequencies either
00:16:31.800 --> 00:16:37.120
Like you said starting with a negative value or positive value where it just interacts with a cone differently
00:16:37.260 --> 00:16:40.020
You just can't reproduce it in the same way. So
00:16:37.860 --> 00:16:43.420
Yep, exactly. And that's still an EQ thing because you're going to have to flip one or
00:16:40.040 --> 00:16:40.100
So
00:16:43.420 --> 00:16:47.720
the other to get them to coincide with each other and then you have to deal with the EQ
00:16:47.760 --> 00:16:52.399
as well. In terms of carving things out, I might bump something a little bit below the
00:16:52.400 --> 00:16:57.060
area for one of the instruments and then I might take something out in that same area
00:16:57.140 --> 00:16:57.760
with the other one.
00:16:57.880 --> 00:17:03.220
So with the kick, I might boost around 55 even though it's like really starting at 60
00:17:03.340 --> 00:17:03.840
so to speak.
00:17:04.120 --> 00:17:10.140
And with the bass, I might cut around the 55 area and boost a little bit more around
00:17:04.720 --> 00:17:04.860
Yeah.
00:17:10.439 --> 00:17:15.880
the 65 or 70 to kind of get them living in a different space even though it seems really
00:17:15.980 --> 00:17:18.579
minor and I'm not doing heavy handed moves with that EQ.
00:17:19.280 --> 00:17:24.240
But I'm doing it to make sure that one lives where the other one is not, even if it's closely
00:17:24.920 --> 00:17:26.560
related in the sound's frequency.
00:17:27.030 --> 00:17:31.340
Now beyond that, if you're getting separation between, say, the bass and the guitars, a
00:17:31.440 --> 00:17:35.480
lot of people may not take the high pass filter to a guitar.
00:17:35.980 --> 00:17:36.200
Yeah.
00:17:36.240 --> 00:17:39.360
Because they, oh, I want everything in that guitar sound, and I get it.
00:17:39.360 --> 00:17:41.960
I understand that there's times when you need that.
00:17:42.270 --> 00:17:47.000
But when you have a heavy bass and a heavy guitar that needs to live in a different
00:17:47.000 --> 00:17:53.080
realm, you might be doing a low pass filter on the bass and a high pass filter on the guitar to
00:17:53.180 --> 00:17:58.000
really separate the distinction between the two. And that will create a lot more space in your mix
00:17:58.080 --> 00:17:59.280
between those two instruments.
00:17:59.720 --> 00:18:02.980
Yeah, so you're essentially creating a little bit more space where you're taking out the
00:18:03.040 --> 00:18:08.920
low lows of the guitar that don't necessarily add too much to the sound, but just kind of
00:18:08.920 --> 00:18:14.440
like clutter up the mix and likewise on the bass where you might not need, depending on
00:18:10.040 --> 00:18:10.180
Huh?
00:18:14.440 --> 00:18:20.080
the part, you might not need all the high end there to create more space for other instruments
00:18:20.170 --> 00:18:21.240
that might live in that area.
00:18:21.500 --> 00:18:25.960
Well, the same can be held true for the synthesizers as well, because, you know, oftentimes when
00:18:21.900 --> 00:18:48.960
So that's something I have to do a lot with one of the projects I work with where it's
00:18:26.020 --> 00:18:30.240
you have the patch of a synth that's meant to be played solo, so to speak, and it has
00:18:30.360 --> 00:18:32.160
this really dense nature to it.
00:18:33.400 --> 00:18:37.480
That doesn't always fly in mixes that have a lot of other instruments going on, so you
00:18:37.480 --> 00:18:43.420
need to do some pretty radical EQ moves at times to get a synth part to sit in there better.
00:18:48.960 --> 00:18:56.540
a relatively layered soundscape, shall we say. And sometimes when you try to do too much,
00:18:57.660 --> 00:19:02.820
you have to be pretty aggressive with your EQ sometimes. Now you could argue that, well,
00:19:02.940 --> 00:19:06.580
you just haven't arranged it well enough. But in this case, it might add something, but
00:19:06.620 --> 00:19:13.280
it's the synth sound, and I think it's synths specifically can tend to take up so much space
00:19:13.300 --> 00:19:17.919
in the frequency range that it just, it can be hard to make it fit. So when you're listening
00:19:17.920 --> 00:19:22.720
to them in solo after they've done mixing they can sometimes sound really really odd
00:19:23.240 --> 00:19:23.880
or tiny.
00:19:23.420 --> 00:19:28.260
but they're not they're not intended to be listened to in that way so that's just the
00:19:28.300 --> 00:19:32.840
way that they they can have maximum impact in your mix and you have to remove a lot of
00:19:32.840 --> 00:19:53.120
stuff. So, yeah. Yes.
00:19:33.240 --> 00:19:38.840
Sure. Now if we're going in line with the idea of the side chaining that you mentioned earlier,
00:19:39.820 --> 00:19:46.820
most often I'm going to be using this in two instances. One is the instance between the kick
00:19:46.820 --> 00:19:53.600
and the bass, and the other instance is between the vocal and the rest of the mix. And I tend to
00:19:53.600 --> 00:20:03.220
do the second one less often. But in the case of kick and bass, depending on which instrument is your
00:20:03.220 --> 00:20:08.920
democracy like your authoritarian in the song, you're going to choose that instrument to
00:20:06.960 --> 00:20:07.120
Yeah.
00:20:08.980 --> 00:20:11.860
drive the side chain output to the other instrument.
00:20:12.310 --> 00:20:18.260
And quite often, especially with things like EDM, it's the kick drum that is much more
00:20:15.980 --> 00:20:16.920
Yeah.
00:20:16.920 --> 00:20:16.960
Yeah.
00:20:18.340 --> 00:20:18.700
important.
00:20:19.160 --> 00:20:23.420
So you're going to have the kick drum feeding a compressor to the bass that when that kick
00:20:23.460 --> 00:20:28.960
drum hits, it dips the value of the bass and automatically creates the space for the kick
00:20:29.040 --> 00:20:30.500
drum to shine.
00:20:31.140 --> 00:20:35.560
And then the bass just slides right back in behind the end of the kick drum sound.
00:20:36.140 --> 00:20:39.540
And the same can be held true for vocals, especially with lead vocals.
00:20:39.670 --> 00:20:44.360
Like if a lead vocal is really having a little bit of trouble, you wouldn't be as aggressive
00:20:44.580 --> 00:20:47.280
with it in terms of how you would sidechain it.
00:20:47.680 --> 00:20:50.260
You have the lead vocal controlling a sidechain.
00:20:50.760 --> 00:20:55.200
And rather than sidechaining the entire mix with the lead vocal, I tend to do it with
00:20:55.280 --> 00:20:56.140
vocal effects.
00:20:57.540 --> 00:21:02.820
vocal effects that keep trailing off into the background of the mix, I'm going to have
00:20:57.620 --> 00:20:57.740
Yeah.
00:21:02.940 --> 00:21:09.480
the lead vocal controlling a side chain compression to those background effects that when the
00:21:09.520 --> 00:21:13.720
lead vocal comes back in and the effect is still going, it's going to dip the effect
00:21:13.880 --> 00:21:18.880
so that the lead vocal still shines while the effect is going and when the lead vocal
00:21:16.480 --> 00:21:23.440
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, often you're talking about delays and
00:21:19.020 --> 00:21:20.920
stops that effect can still shine.
00:21:23.500 --> 00:21:27.720
reverbs and things like that now where you might have a trailing echo going on in it
00:21:25.160 --> 00:21:25.600
Yes.
00:21:27.720 --> 00:21:30.080
it essentially just kind of muddies up the lead vocal line.
00:21:30.140 --> 00:21:35.100
So you can use that, the side chaining to essentially just duck those out of the way.
00:21:35.400 --> 00:21:36.680
And that's really effective way.
00:21:36.580 --> 00:21:40.800
And that can also be applied to any other instrument because guitars can have a lot of delays on
00:21:40.800 --> 00:21:45.300
them as well or any instrument that where if he's got an effect on it that's trailing
00:21:45.400 --> 00:21:49.140
the instrument, oftentimes it is a good idea to side chain it.
00:21:49.160 --> 00:21:49.600
Yeah.
00:21:50.180 --> 00:21:51.040
So get it out of the way.
00:21:51.360 --> 00:21:55.340
Another thing that we can do, of course, is, you know, multi-band compression.
00:21:55.680 --> 00:21:58.740
if there is a certain frequency range where, you know,
00:21:58.840 --> 00:22:00.740
let's say that there's a certain part of the song
00:22:00.860 --> 00:22:03.520
where the bass is just certain frequencies
00:22:03.520 --> 00:22:05.320
are just building up too much or something.
00:22:05.000 --> 00:22:05.440
Uh-huh.
00:22:05.440 --> 00:22:08.340
We can use set multi-band compression for that range
00:22:08.520 --> 00:22:11.840
or even dynamic EQs and things like that
00:22:11.960 --> 00:22:13.440
to deal with problem areas.
00:22:13.620 --> 00:22:15.880
A lot of these issues that we're talking about
00:22:16.300 --> 00:22:19.520
frequency-wise I think can be traced back
00:22:19.800 --> 00:22:24.080
to possibly being solved at the arrangement stage
00:22:23.560 --> 00:22:27.980
Or even the initial recording stage with how you recorded something.
00:22:28.040 --> 00:22:30.100
where-- in the defense of that, though,
00:22:30.220 --> 00:22:31.860
if when we're tracking something,
00:22:32.020 --> 00:22:35.260
we might not realize that we're creating an issue
00:22:35.300 --> 00:22:37.640
because other things could be built on later.
00:22:37.860 --> 00:22:40.140
But it is good to think about these things.
00:22:40.780 --> 00:22:44.400
And the way of fixing stuff, obviously, in the mix,
00:22:44.480 --> 00:22:47.360
is always-- should always be predicated by get it
00:22:47.380 --> 00:22:48.500
right at the source first.
00:22:48.820 --> 00:22:50.340
So we're just enhancing us to have
00:22:50.340 --> 00:22:54.060
to do heavy-handed carving with EQ or compression
00:22:54.060 --> 00:23:00.360
or any of that kind of stuff. So, but those are things that we can do to create separation with
00:22:55.660 --> 00:22:55.960
I agree.
00:23:00.760 --> 00:23:07.960
the volume, the panning obviously, and then EQ. Now, what about besides side chaining thing,
00:23:08.560 --> 00:23:15.300
do you ever get really heavy handed with compression or anything to sort of stop a
00:23:16.180 --> 00:23:20.640
certain instrument of really, really sort of taking over the mix and parts?
00:23:20.940 --> 00:23:26.080
or is that primarily a volume and volume automation thing for you?
00:23:26.380 --> 00:23:28.380
Let's say that there's a percussion part, for example.
00:23:28.920 --> 00:23:30.320
It would depend on the performance.
00:23:30.780 --> 00:23:39.200
If the performance is like screwy in terms of its actual volume levels, that's something
00:23:31.300 --> 00:23:31.480
Yeah.
00:23:37.480 --> 00:23:38.880
Yeah.
00:23:39.300 --> 00:23:41.400
that you use a volume ride for that.
00:23:41.460 --> 00:23:45.940
So you're just looking at the waveform and figuring out where is it getting louder, where
00:23:45.940 --> 00:23:47.580
is it getting softer kind of thing.
00:23:47.920 --> 00:23:54.400
If it's a general move that isn't super sharp, that's easier to deal with with a volume ride
00:23:54.460 --> 00:23:54.760
automation.
00:23:54.960 --> 00:23:56.140
Yeah.
00:23:55.980 --> 00:24:01.840
If it is something where it's just not a consistent performance from the artist in and of themselves,
00:24:03.080 --> 00:24:05.320
well then there's a couple of ways to deal with it.
00:24:05.400 --> 00:24:09.200
You can do some volume automation for one and two, you throw some compression on it,
00:24:09.280 --> 00:24:14.240
depending on or limiting, and depending on how heavy-handed you need to be, you do what
00:24:14.300 --> 00:24:19.020
you need to do to get it hammered into submission, so to speak, or hammered into shining ability
00:24:19.020 --> 00:24:20.180
of wherever it needs to be.
00:24:20.140 --> 00:24:25.560
For me, that often happens with a percussion part.
00:24:25.620 --> 00:24:33.380
and it might be a tambourine or a shaker part where there might be certain aspects of the performance
00:24:33.490 --> 00:24:38.340
that are just like poking out too much, whether there's an accent that just kind of triggers a little bit too much.
00:24:38.750 --> 00:24:44.460
And while in isolation that might sound like a really human sort of dynamic performance,
00:24:45.080 --> 00:24:50.560
for that to perhaps sit better and even get more clarity like we're talking about right now,
00:24:51.240 --> 00:24:54.680
sometimes just like compressing that a little bit more to make sure that you
00:24:54.700 --> 00:24:59.360
even out the dynamics you're not necessarily losing the the human
00:24:59.900 --> 00:25:03.740
performance of it you're just making it a little bit steadier to kind of sit in
00:25:03.740 --> 00:25:07.440
the mix where you'd like it to be and therefore creating its own space type of
00:25:07.460 --> 00:25:11.820
thing that's one thing where some fast attack compression like 1176 type of
00:25:07.920 --> 00:25:08.040
Sure.
00:25:11.860 --> 00:25:23.540
think can come in handy. Yes. It's true. And especially if
00:25:14.010 --> 00:25:14.140
Yep.
00:25:14.380 --> 00:25:17.920
And the next thing that you kind of have to take a look at in terms of creating separation
00:25:17.920 --> 00:25:21.740
often has to do with timing from the performances in and of themselves.
00:25:23.640 --> 00:25:27.700
you're overdubbing parts, right, or not overdubbing parts, I'm
00:25:27.720 --> 00:25:30.700
sorry, when you're layering parts, if you're having two
00:25:30.740 --> 00:25:33.140
guitars, three guitars doing the same thing to kind of build
00:25:33.280 --> 00:25:36.460
that up, that's obviously want to make sure that all of those
00:25:36.600 --> 00:25:41.179
things are really good, or you're smearing the track as it
00:25:41.180 --> 00:25:45.760
were. And that brings up another thing that I like to touch on as well, because I recently
00:25:45.960 --> 00:25:52.160
did a mix where I employed this, and I hadn't done the tracking on this session. But there
00:25:52.220 --> 00:26:00.020
were guitars that had been recorded with three different microphones. And that's, that's
00:25:59.580 --> 00:26:04.360
It's not, it's a lot for most people. It's not necessarily a lot for some things that
00:26:00.040 --> 00:26:15.140
a lot. Yes, I could be wrong. I'm just speculating here because the engineer that did the basic
00:26:04.420 --> 00:26:09.060
I've seen. But generally speaking, if you're using a lot of mics, you're doing it as a
00:26:09.060 --> 00:26:09.460
blend
00:26:15.240 --> 00:26:22.440
tracking overall did a really good job. But this was going to be multi-tracked distorted
00:26:22.580 --> 00:26:28.780
guitar parts left and right. And I believe it was even doubled in some parts. And when
00:26:28.780 --> 00:26:35.100
When you have three microphones that are there that from my perspective in a dense mix, they
00:26:35.320 --> 00:26:37.400
didn't necessarily complement each other.
00:26:37.880 --> 00:26:41.560
It seemed like it was more of an issue where, well, we have all these available.
00:26:42.380 --> 00:26:46.020
Let's use them all and then decide down the line what we're going to use.
00:26:46.480 --> 00:26:47.380
Yeah.
00:26:47.600 --> 00:26:48.560
That can happen.
00:26:49.420 --> 00:26:53.200
If you're the producer and you're not really sure of what it is that you're going for,
00:26:53.380 --> 00:26:55.300
you get the performance to do it.
00:26:56.300 --> 00:27:02.100
In my case, when it came to mixing this, I ultimately found that it wasn't necessarily
00:27:02.260 --> 00:27:03.940
getting a pleasing mix out of that.
00:27:04.140 --> 00:27:07.380
And it was a dense mix to begin with, a lot of instrumentation going on.
00:27:07.840 --> 00:27:12.820
So I ended up just mixing two of them, and I just ended up keeping like 57.
00:27:10.400 --> 00:27:10.580
Hmm.
00:27:13.500 --> 00:27:16.300
Like there's no magic, no...
00:27:15.220 --> 00:27:16.380
Stand by, standard.
00:27:16.780 --> 00:27:19.040
Yeah, there was no professor shit going on here.
00:27:19.080 --> 00:27:22.420
It was just like 57 left and right, and that was it.
00:27:22.660 --> 00:27:28.100
that ended up being more suitable in my opinion for the mix. Sometimes again,
00:27:28.300 --> 00:27:31.980
they're just because you can doesn't mean that you should, right? If you're not
00:27:32.260 --> 00:27:38.580
sure why you're using multitudes of mics on the source, perhaps going with one or
00:27:38.680 --> 00:27:42.680
if you have to two, right? If they're complimenting each other. So that's
00:27:41.400 --> 00:27:41.500
Sure.
00:27:42.140 --> 00:27:42.700
I concur.
00:27:42.780 --> 00:27:46.760
something else to keep in mind when something can sound just like overbearing
00:27:46.860 --> 00:27:51.419
in the mix because you got double tracked guitars and they each have three tracks
00:27:51.420 --> 00:27:56.140
going at the same time, you know, and getting that blend right. So sometimes that's the
00:27:56.160 --> 00:28:08.140
saying goes less is more, right, or at least bigger impact. Yeah, well, more is always more,
00:28:01.600 --> 00:28:04.640
I'm not sure I'll agree with either of those statements, but okay.
00:28:08.300 --> 00:28:10.220
Exactly. Less is less, more is more.
00:28:08.460 --> 00:28:10.200
but not more isn't always better.
00:28:11.100 --> 00:28:11.640
All right, Ingve.
00:28:11.140 --> 00:28:14.520
But what the song is called, it's whatever the song calls for.
00:28:15.040 --> 00:28:18.520
And if the song is not calling for having a really dense guitar sound
00:28:15.059 --> 00:28:15.620
Yeah.
00:28:18.640 --> 00:28:22.620
or a really dense kick drum sound or whatever it is that you're multi
00:28:22.720 --> 00:28:25.300
mic'ing with a bazillion mics, don't do it.
00:28:25.240 --> 00:28:26.960
Yeah, yeah, I agree.
00:28:26.360 --> 00:28:27.100
Just don't do it.
00:28:27.300 --> 00:28:32.660
And with that, we're going to move into our Friday finds.
00:28:33.240 --> 00:28:33.800
Yes.
00:28:34.300 --> 00:28:35.180
What do you got for us, Chris?
00:28:35.700 --> 00:28:42.580
Well, I was super impressed with a plugin that I have used for a while now.
00:28:41.559 --> 00:28:43.060
Uh-huh.
00:28:43.180 --> 00:28:44.100
And you have as well.
00:28:44.200 --> 00:28:48.120
And this is something that you showed me and my jaw kind of hit the floor.
00:28:48.700 --> 00:28:54.460
I'm talking about isotopes RX nine, which the whole suite is just amazing.
00:28:51.440 --> 00:28:52.200
Uh-huh.
00:28:52.200 --> 00:28:52.420
Uh-huh.
00:28:54.740 --> 00:28:58.940
I don't know what kind of code sorcerers they have over there at isotope, but
00:28:59.040 --> 00:29:04.500
they're, they're doing something inhumane and just amazing stuff.
00:29:04.820 --> 00:29:07.400
But what I'm talking about today is music rebalance.
00:29:06.640 --> 00:29:08.040
Yes.
00:29:08.040 --> 00:29:08.220
Yes.
00:29:08.860 --> 00:29:14.180
And you showed me something where that was used on a stereo track that you had gotten.
00:29:14.540 --> 00:29:14.780
Mm hmm.
00:29:15.340 --> 00:29:18.200
And I believe to use the ARA version of it.
00:29:18.540 --> 00:29:18.720
Yep.
00:29:18.860 --> 00:29:22.200
And the job it did was fricking amazing.
00:29:22.760 --> 00:29:24.140
It was really, really impressive.
00:29:24.320 --> 00:29:27.660
So that has to be my Friday fan for this week.
00:29:27.780 --> 00:29:34.360
I stopped RX 9 music rebalance because that was some seriously impressive stuff right there.
00:29:34.360 --> 00:29:37.440
Yeah, it was jaw dropping to say the least.
00:29:38.420 --> 00:29:42.480
Because I know you were excited to because you called me as like dude, you have to listen
00:29:40.919 --> 00:29:42.140
Dude, you gotta hear this.
00:29:42.620 --> 00:29:42.860
to this.
00:29:42.990 --> 00:29:44.560
You don't have time, but you gotta do it now.
00:29:43.200 --> 00:29:43.520
Yeah.
00:29:44.840 --> 00:29:45.200
Yeah.
00:29:45.060 --> 00:29:46.020
Yeah, that was pretty amazing.
00:29:46.400 --> 00:29:47.120
What about you?
00:29:47.160 --> 00:29:47.640
What do you got?
00:29:47.760 --> 00:29:54.580
My find for this week is a new compressor by a company that is a new company, relatively
00:29:54.740 --> 00:30:00.760
new, called Mixland, and they have a new compressor out called the Rubber Band Compressor.
00:30:00.860 --> 00:30:04.640
That almost sounds like it's the obvious of what we've been talking about today, but,
00:30:04.480 --> 00:30:05.640
Almost, almost.
00:30:05.980 --> 00:30:06.040
yeah.
00:30:06.560 --> 00:30:11.040
The interesting thing about the interface on this particular compressor is that it actually
00:30:11.160 --> 00:30:13.720
has a pair of hands holding a rubber band in it.
00:30:14.300 --> 00:30:14.780
Okay
00:30:14.360 --> 00:30:19.280
And that thing moves based on the sound that's going through it and the settings that you
00:30:19.340 --> 00:30:20.340
set on it.
00:30:20.800 --> 00:30:21.740
It's pretty fun to watch.
00:30:20.899 --> 00:30:21.320
Hmm
00:30:22.760 --> 00:30:24.260
It's based on VCA compression.
00:30:24.699 --> 00:30:25.200
Okay
00:30:25.020 --> 00:30:31.980
And you can set the tension of how tight the rubber band is that allows it to react differently
00:30:32.220 --> 00:30:34.100
if the rubber band is set looser.
00:30:34.960 --> 00:30:39.300
And it's like a typical compressor in and of itself other than the rubber band settings.
00:30:40.120 --> 00:30:42.560
It's really amazing what this compressor can do.
00:30:42.870 --> 00:30:48.920
Right now I believe it's still on sale for like 20 bucks or maybe it's $29 and then it's
00:30:46.760 --> 00:30:50.620
Cool oh well that case I'm out yeah
00:30:48.960 --> 00:30:49.440
going to go up.
00:30:50.500 --> 00:30:56.580
Yeah, it's not it's not overly expensive and it's got a really neat interface and the sound
00:30:50.620 --> 00:30:51.000
Yeah, right.
00:30:56.820 --> 00:31:00.000
and what it can do is really quite amazing for a compressor.
00:31:00.580 --> 00:31:03.020
I'm recommending the rubber band compressor by Mixland.
00:31:03.620 --> 00:31:04.120
Cool.
00:31:04.480 --> 00:31:10.380
While we've got your attention, we're going to ask that you go to our website and leave
00:31:10.410 --> 00:31:17.420
us a review at insidetherecordingstudio.com/review or just go to insidetherecordingstudio.com and
00:31:17.500 --> 00:31:19.020
sign up for our email list.
00:31:19.390 --> 00:31:23.980
Doing so gets you weekly reminders about our episodes and the Tuesday tips when they come
00:31:24.080 --> 00:31:27.640
out and we'll make sure that you don't miss any future episodes.
00:31:27.990 --> 00:31:34.460
The extra added bonus of being on the email list is when we are doing a giveaway, you
00:31:34.620 --> 00:31:40.360
to win. Doesn't mean you will win, but you are automatically entered. Yes, send us an email at
00:31:40.440 --> 00:31:46.500
goldstar@insidetherecordingstudio.com with the word separation, and you'll get something cool
00:31:46.560 --> 00:31:52.060
back in your inbox. And if you have a topic of suggestion for us to explain in a future episode,
00:31:52.460 --> 00:32:04.440
run to the contact page on the website, hint hint, and we'll put it into consideration for a
00:32:01.800 --> 00:32:02.460
Have a good one, Jody.
00:32:02.840 --> 00:32:03.640
Thanks for listening, people.