‘The Stairways to Mixing Heaven’: Designs for the Optimisation of Creative Mixing Practices in Popular Music Record Production

S706200 Brendan Anthony

(Dip. MusTech, Griffith; Grad. Cert. Higher Ed., Griffith)

Email: [email protected]

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the award of Master of Music.

Abstract

As music technology ever develops, so too the creative practices and sonic outcomes of popular music productions evolve in response. This project therefore investigates the ways in which user-led system design informs the author’s practice as a recording studio mix engineer and as co-creator of popular music recordings.

The dissertation details a two-year study into the Stairways mixing preparation framework developed by the author. Stairways will be tested for its suitability to design personalised mixing systems with a view to achieving optimum creative results for various musical styles. The study documents the creation of mixes for eight original pieces of music, as written by six artists /bands, and where this development has been traced to provide a number of interpretations as 18 tracks on an accompanying CD portfolio. This compares the original artist ‘rough’ mixes with further insights into the application of digital and hybrid analogue systems.

This project is situated within the field of professional practice and therefore draws upon a range of literature including scholarly texts, trade magazines, popular music press, practitioner interviews and weblogs. A mixed method research design employs the author’s multi-decade experience as a mix professional and educator via a practice-based approach to detail the processes involved in the creation of the original music in question. This is situated within three action research cycles that progress the design by detailing the insights gained from each recording session as they progress over time and where various emergent sonic and creative phenomenon are examined. The dissertation is supported by a detailed series of appendices to present technical approaches, reflective journal entries and philosophical considerations for how to approach a given mix.

The dissertation concludes with an assessment of the Stairways process, an offering of deeper insights into overall design for mixing popular music and suggestions as to how both mix professionals and students alike might benefit in light of their own settings and/or experience. More centrally, the findings and conclusions return to explore the author’s own changed thinking and artistic knowledge in relation to the evolving processes that have been explored and developed throughout.

i

Table of Contents

List of Figures ...... v List of Tables ...... v Certification ...... vi

Chapter One: Introduction ...... 1

Locating the research ...... 3 The ‘stairways’ to mixing heaven ...... 4 The mixer’s imagery, creative practice and ‘sonic footprint’ ...... 5 Research questions ...... 7 Research methods ...... 7 1. Action research ...... 7 2. Critical listening and analysis ...... 8 3. Practice-based approaches ...... 9 Dissertation structure ...... 11 Concluding remarks ...... 12

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music: A Comparison of Stairway Designed Analogue and Digital Processes ...... 14

Artist 1: The Phoncurves, Lover (Alternate Folk) ...... 14 Comparisons of the OTB and ITB mixes for Lover ...... 15 Preliminary findings re. the Lover mixes ...... 16 Artist 2: Dave’s Pawn Shop (DPS) Requiem (Heavy Rock) ...... 17 Comparisons of the OTB and ITB mixes for Requiem ...... 19 Preliminary findings re. the Requiem mixes ...... 20 Chapter synopsis ...... 22

Chapter Three: Finding ‘The Beat’: A Comparison of Analogue and Digital Mixing Processes Within Electronic Music ...... 24

Artist 3: Maximo Family (Hip Hop) ...... 24 Comparisons of the OTB and ITB mixes for Family ...... 26 Preliminary findings re. the Family mixes ...... 27 Notes for future reference ...... 28 Artist 4: Ben Sinclair ‘Elements’ (Progressive House) ...... 28 Comparisons of the OTB and ITB mixes for Elements ...... 30

ii

Preliminary findings re. the Elements mixes ...... 31 Chapter synopsis ...... 31

Chapter Four: Creative Processes: Designing an Individualized Mix System for Popular Music Styles ...... 33

Artist 5: Aquilla Young Vagabond, mixed OTB and Tide mixed ITB ...... 34 Comparisons of the Vagabond OTB and Tide ITB mixes ...... 35 Preliminary findings re. the Vagabond and Tide mixes ...... 36 Notes for future reference ...... 37 Artist 6: Creature Kind, I’ll Make You Mine and Forever ...... 37 Comparisons of I’ll Make You Mine OTB and Forever ITB mixes ...... 39 Preliminary findings re. I’ll Make You Mine and Forever ...... 40 On individuality ...... 42 Chapter synopsis ...... 43

Chapter Five: Findings and Conclusions ...... 44

2) How are creative workflow and/or performance practice affected by various mix systems? ...... 45 3) Do Stairways designed mixing systems (OTB, ITB) produce suitable sonic outcomes (footprint) in varying styles of music? ...... 46 4) Are certain music styles best suited to particular mixing systems? And if so, why might this be? ...... 46 5) Does creative practice affect the sonic outcomes (footprint) of a mix? ...... 47 Toward an individualised mix practice ...... 48 Conclusions and future research ...... 48

References ...... 50

Discography ...... 56

CD Portfolio of Works ...... 57

Appendices ...... 59

Appendix 1: Philosophy, creative workflow, and the essential dimensions of the mix .... 60

Appendix 2: Productions styles of AC music and their influence on system design...... 65 Appendix 3: OTB mix for Lover (CD portfolio, track 2) ...... 66 Appendix 4: ITB Mix for Lover (CD portfolio, track 3) ...... 69

iii

Appendix 5: OTB Mix for Requiem (CD portfolio, track 5) ...... 72 Appendix 6: ITB Mix for Requiem (CD portfolio, track 6) ...... 75 Appendix 7: Electronic production styles and their influence on my mix practice ...... 79 Appendix 8: Stairway and gateway key for EL mixes ...... 81 Appendix 9: ITB Mix for Family (CD portfolio, track 9) ...... 82 Appendix 10: OTB Mix for Family (CD portfolio, track 8) ...... 85 Appendix 11: ITB Mix for Elements (CD portfolio, track 12) ...... 87 Appendix 12: OTB Mix for Elements (CD portfolio, track 11) ...... 89 Appendix 13: Action research cycles for Chapter Four...... 91

Appendix 14: Stairway and Gateway key for Aquilla Young and Creature Kind mixes .. 93

Appendix 15: OTB mix Vagabond (CD portfolio, track 14) ...... 95 Appendix 16: ITB mix Tide (CD portfolio, track 14) ...... 98 Appendix 17: OTB mix I’ll Make You Mine (CD portfolio, track 17) ...... 102 Appendix 18: ITB mix Forever (CD portfolio, track 18) ...... 104

iv

List of Figures

Figure 1: William Moylan’s perceived performance environment ...... 9

Figure 2: Roey Izhaki’s stereo mixing concepts ...... 9

Figure 3: Individualised mix practice ...... 43

Figure 4: Individualised mix design ...... 91

List of Tables

Table 1: Analysis and comparison, Lover...... 4

Table 2: Analysis and comparison, Requiem ...... 18

Table 3: Analysis and comparison, Family...... 25

Table 4: Analysis and comparison, Elements ...... 29

Table 5: Analysis and comparison, Aquilla Young ...... 36

Table 6: Analysis and comparison, Creature Kind ...... 39

v

Certification

I hereby certify this work is original and has not previously been submitted in whole or part by me or any other person for any qualification or award in any university. I further certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, these research papers contain no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the papers themselves.

Signed: ______

Date: ______

vi

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge the supervision I received from Dr Donna Weston and Professor Paul Draper. Their guidance was integral to the outcome of this research.

vii Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Chapter One

Introduction

As a producer and mix engineer, my training consisted of four years of university study (Dip.MusTech) followed by 24 years of professional practice. I progressed as an assistant engineer, working with and learning from well-established popular music producers and ‘mixers’. Following this I worked worldwide for many published artists while developing and crafting my trade as a producer, audio engineer and mixer. While I believe there is no universal concept for record production or mixing, there are many commonalities through which a highly individualised practice may be developed.

Popular music record production has incorporated dedicated ‘mix-down’ processes ever since the inception of the multi-track format and this has become an essential component of the overall creative outcomes. The development of technology has influenced how the mixer operates and this has changed the representation of popular music over time. With the evolution of the digital analogue workstation (DAW), the mix process has now been split into two primary practices: i) inside the computer (in the box, ITB) and ii) a hybrid of ITB and analogue console processing (outside the box, OTB). These two approaches often use differing equipment, setups and artistic options to generate and finesse various sonic and musical characteristics. These variances in creative practices and resulting ‘sonic footprint’ are the primary focus of this research project.

‘Sonic footprint’ is a term commonly used in the popular music industry to describe the overall sound of a recording, including characteristics of timbre, dynamics and spatiality. These attributes imprint a sonic ‘identity’ on the music and this identity can align with musical style consistencies. This in turn aids the listener in understanding the artistic interpretation of the musician and producer, and when combined with the song, production and mix, enhances the possibilities for the listener to have a personal connection with the final product. One of the mixer’s primary objectives is therefore to evoke an emotional response from the listener. Emotions such as: happiness, sadness, love, anger or the feeling of power can be experienced through musical, melodic, lyrical and sonic expression. The transference of musical production to emotional perception by the listener is the end goal of many songs and mixing may be considered as the final ‘icing on the

Chapter One: Introduction 1 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven cake’ required to shape these experiences for the listener. To accomplish this, many professional mixers transform the overall process from one of technical to that of a creative practice, as Roey Izhaki writes:

Many mixes are technically great, but nothing more then that; equally many mixes are not technically perfect, but as a listening experience they are breathtaking. It is for their sheer creativity – not for their technical brilliance – that some mixes are highly acclaimed and their creators deemed sonic visionaries. (2008, p. xiv)

The first recording that inspired me in this way was when Australian rock act INXS released their sixth studio album Kick (1987). I was 20 years old and in my third year of university studying music technology. Through these studies I had discovered new means through which to listen critically and to begin to hear music in new ways. To this day I continue to discover and be inspired by new music and mixes that I believe are exemplary: these influences include Seal (1991), Sound Awake (Karnivool, 2009), Wasting Light (Foo Fighters, 2011), Teenage Dream (Katy Perry, 2010) and 4x4 =12 (Deadmau5, 2010).

The mixing engineer for Kick was Bob Clearmountain, one of the pioneers who established a niche for so-called ‘third party mixing’1 as a specialised career pathway. Many have followed in his footsteps: Chris Lorde Alge (CLA) comes to mind as a modern day Clearmountain. In the 1990s I was fortunate enough to work with CLA on Ian Moss’s Matchbook album (1989). Reflecting on my discussions with him, I became increasingly aware that professional mixers deliver a product that is influenced by their individualized mix system. Such a system generates a particular sound and the mixer intuitively uses their own creative practices to manipulate a product that evokes an emotional response from the listeners. However, with respect to system design the mixer fraternity continues to express inconsistencies of opinion at the time of writing. For example, CLA and others prefer mixing via a large-scale analogue /console setup (OTB) (Pensado’s Place, 2012). By contrast, renowned record producer Mark Stent (Massive Attack, U2, Lady Gaga) offers, “I mix most urban and pop records in the box now, while rock and acoustic records are usually done via the G-series desk” (cited in Tingen, 2010, para. 7). Such information suggests professionals use a highly personalised practice in order to

1 ‘Third party mixing’ is when a mixer is brought in at the final stages, having not been involvd in the tracking stages. This is to promote a fresh perspective and new ideas to the final outcome.

Chapter One: Introduction 2 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven obtain quality results. However, Stent’s words appear to attribute the choice of mix system to the style of music being mixed, but I wonder: what factors determine which mix system he prefers and more importantly, why?

Following Stent’s ideas further, a classification of popular music into ‘styles’ may be identified. For example: ‘urban’ and ‘pop’ record instrumentation is largely generated and produced inside the computer with the vocals often remaining as the only natural sounds. In contrast, ‘rock’ and ‘acoustic’ records are mostly recorded in an acoustic environment using microphones. From this one might assume that Stent prefers to mix electronic-based music (EL) ITB and acoustic-based music (AC) OTB. This classification of musical styles is used throughout this dissertation. Varying music styles (due to their different ‘generation of sound’, production and performance) have varying sonic footprints and artistic interpretation. Acoustically performed sounds can have a more organic nature to them compared to the more consistent, stringent and often pieced-together characteristics of a programmed part. With particular reference to Chapters Two, Three and Four of this dissertation, I incorporate such a classification system to identify and separate music for the mixing sessions and therefore aim to unpack any effects that the ‘generation of sound’ and the associated production processes may have on various mix outputs.

This research enquiry proposes that it is the responsibility of the mix engineer to design the most appropriate system to facilitate a) a best fit for personal creative practice and b) to generate a suitable ‘sonic footprint’ for each individual song. These concepts will be explored in this dissertation in order to:

1) Propose the theory that quality mixing and the quest for optimum ‘sonic footprint’ /emotional transference may be achieved through a balance of technological system design, stylistic awareness and creative application.

2) Present tangible examples that are associated with the creative practices of various mix systems (ITB, OTB) when mixing different music styles.

3) Contribute to the author’s development as a mixer and to the growing body of literature associated with the relatively new idea of record production as a scholarly discipline. Locating the research

My professional practice is grounded in practice-based learning, as Göran Folkestad elaborates, “… by participating in a practice, one also learns the practice” (2006, p.138). In the course of my career I have learnt mixing techniques from many high

Chapter One: Introduction 3 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven profile producers within a large scale analogue studio environment and then as a freelance mixer I continued to develop highly personal processes that combined what I had been taught with what I believe suited me as an individual. My background and the equipment informing my career progression continue to influence my practice (perhaps this is reflected in my current preference for OTB systems). I have used my personal experience to develop a process for every mix I undertake and this is central to the dissertation, and as a methodology to be tested and unpacked throughout the investigation. The ‘stairways’ to mixing heaven

The Stairways concept is a mix design framework I have developed through the 24 years of my professional practice and where future possibilities continue to evolve (see Appendix 1). The ultimate goal is to deliver to the artist a mix that incorporates their creative vision, but also aims to add pleasing attributes they may not have considered. The Stairways process allows me to design the mix system specifically for the song in question because I believe that mixing is not a one-size-fits-all practice, but rather, it should use artistically oriented information to inform related decisions about equipment selection and overall creative workflow. In this I also believe that mixing is much like a performance and the knowledge of my tools must be clearly thought out, put together and understood prior to starting any mix-down. The Stairways concept nurtures and propels my musicality, as Mixerman (2010) writes, “mixing is neither a linear process nor a technical one. It’s a musical process, and as such, a mix is something that one performs-like an artist” (p.15).

The analogy used for my mix design is that it is like climbing a number of ‘stairways’ – the mixer must take note of every step taken before arriving at a final ‘gateway’. Climbing the stairways helps design the key (mix system); this opens the gate and the mixer enters a creative space in order to achieve the often elusive ‘sonic identity’. The mix system should not get in the way of the creative process – it must allow the mixer to be free to perform and generate a great mix. The Stairways process is central to the methodology that underpins this dissertation and is a core resource in unpacking the design of various mixes. This process is as follows:

Stairway 1: Who is the mix for?

Stairway 2: Understand how mix systems and equipment generate their sound.

Stairway 3: Understand that the song and its production are essential.

Stairway 4: Use artists’ references.

Chapter One: Introduction 4 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Stairway 5: Listen to the artist’s ‘rough mix’ and analyse it.

Gateway Key: Understand that engineering skills are pre-requisite; then review, design and setup the mix system before commencing a new project.

Each of these Stairways incorporate a number of steps, and these steps may have varying weighting in relevance, however it is more important to understand that all of the steps are integral to the formation of the Stairway. For example Stairway 1: Understand who the mix is for, consists of various possible steps: a) the artist b) the record company c) the intended audience and their possible expectations. All of these steps will impact on the design of the Stairway and its associated impact on mix system design. Looking more holistically perhaps Stairways 3: Understand that the song and its production are essential, may hold more influence in possible outcomes than other Stairways, however again what is of more relevance here is knowing that all of the steps within the Stairway (the song, performance, instrumentation) need to be considered. This Stairway (like the one before it) leads to the next and all form the way to possible mix greatness (Heaven).

This dissertation aims to test whether the Stairways process can design and be responsive to ITB and OTB mix systems, and to deliver quality mixes for varying music styles. For example: does this method facilitate the development of a creative vision for the mix and relevant mix system design for every individual song prior to starting? Roey Izhaki (2008) supports the idea of imagining an outcome and then creating that in a mix (p. 21). Zak (2001) reinforces this with a plethora of quotes from famous producers who tend to insist on this way of thinking in production and mixing practices (p.129). My vision therefore aspires to empower my creative work via these Stairways /Gateway keys, and to imagine the mix in advance. The mixer’s imagery, creative practice and ‘sonic footprint’

A mix may consist of many individual elements, yet a truly ‘great’ mix sounds as one complete entity. Izhaki (2008) elaborates, “it is worth remembering that the mix-as-a-whole is the final product. This is not to say that the sound of individual elements is not important, but the overall mix takes priority” (p. 34). With a more creative emphasis Sacks (2007) discusses how the musician (and the mixer-as- musician) may possess remarkable powers of musical imagery, and hears the entire representation of a composition in the mind prior to creation (p. 33).

Chapter One: Introduction 5 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Supporting such creative processes, Zak (2001) emphasizes the negative influence that the loss of emotion can have on a mix whilst describing Ed Cheney’s idea of “over tweaking” past the point where that “indefinable thing” or creative goal is lost (p. 59). Richard Burgess (2001) adds that “making a great track or album is about capturing a special energy or emotion” (p.185), therefore, the creative practice cannot be underestimated but in this case, is delivered via a mix system and the technologies that coalesce in a given system. The mixer must use all of this information to design a system that will nurture creativity while delivering a certain style of ‘sound’ or sonic footprint. Stairways one, four and five are supported by these ideas as they attempt to develop imagery that creative processes must produce.

Stairways two, three and the Gateway key are further supported by studies including Buskin (1999), Savona (2005), Massey (2005) and Farinella (2006). Throughout, these works interrogate a collection of interviews with some of the world’s leading record producers and mixers. In general, the literature tends to support this project’s themes by solidifying the evidence for the artistic /creative processes involved in designing mix systems in mind of certain sonic outcomes. Similarly, Katz (2007) outlines technical and artistic perceptions of ITB and OTB summing processes where Mixerman (2010) discusses inadequacies of the ITB summing system. By contrast, Kashiwa (2013) outlines support for the ITB mix process as a complete replacement for the OTB system. These ideas are integral to the analysis of the dissertation because there is much comparison between various mix systems their sonic outputs and creative applications. Additionally, Brown (2008) and Tingen (2010) discuss approaches that a producer may have utilized or adapted according to musical style and intended audience. Other commentators support Tingen’s (2010) thoughts for mixing applications including Stavrou (2003) and Izhaki (2008). Toulson’s (2008) article discusses the overuse of equalization in a mix-down process while Moylan (2009) and Gibson (2005) discuss the relevance of spatial representation and visual tools to aid in mix dimensions.

De Man and Reiss (2013) draw together the conclusions of many of the above in an attempt to discuss a so-called ‘semantic approach to autonomous mixing’, where the planning and vision of the mixer is emphasized. Mike Senior (2011) focuses on how producers can utilize the home environment and the ITB system to achieve professional mix results. In sum, I believe that much of the literature tends to support the opportunity for the Stairways process to be further investigated here.

Chapter One: Introduction 6 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Research questions

While much literature discusses mix system design in relation to sonic outcomes (or ‘footprint’), it would seem that little has been investigated regarding the creative mixing practices themselves. The Stairways methodology aims to achieve just this, and further supports the idea of a mix as being ‘performed’ by limiting non-essential technological distractions. To summarise the preceding discussion, research questions are raised as:

1) Does the Stairways process facilitate an appropriate creative vision for various musical styles?

2) What impact do various mix systems have on creative workflow and/or performance practices?

3) Can Stairways-designed mix systems (OTB, ITB) produce a suitable sonic footprint for varying styles of music?

4) Are the sonic outputs of mix systems equally dependent on the equipment used and/or the ability of the user?

5) Does creative practice affect the sonic footprint of a mix?

These questions raise comparisons between ITB and OTB mix systems. This is not intended as a ‘which system is best’ scenario, rather a presentation of a best fit for personal creative practice and reflection on the Stairways ability to design suitable mix systems in various formats. This will indeed test the Stairways method particularly with ITB mix systems, systems I have used rarely.

Research methods

1. Action research

I examine six artists’ projects as case studies (Robson, 2002) in order to answer these questions, and to do so, each project uses the Stairways design in order to acquire a vision for each piece in advance. Specific insights into the use of ITB and OTB hybrid systems are logged in a creative journal (see Appendices 3-4, 5-6, 9-12, and 15-18) and upon completion, this is analysed, compared, and considered with specific attention to creative workflow and sonic footprint. Overall, the pieces are arranged in three action cycles of plan, act and review:

Chapter One: Introduction 7 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Cycle One: Mix two acoustic (AC) tracks ITB and OTB and compare /analyse the results.

Cycle Two: Evaluate methodology and adapt if necessary and mix two electronic (EL) tracks ITB and OTB and then analyse and compare the results.

Cycle Three: Evaluate and adapt as required, mix two songs of the same artist, one ITB and one OTB, compare and analyse if the two mixes could be released on the same record (this is done twice for two different artists).

Robson (2002) discusses “evaluation, action research and change” and outlines the importance of “real world self-evaluation” and the necessity to embrace change as a method of research (p. 6). Therefore broadly, my methodological process employs action research in order to review, understand and move forward to the next cycle, the approach developing and changing as the findings of each mixing session are revealed and better understood. The following series of expectations and approaches frame and unpack this process at a more detailed level.

2. Critical listening and analysis

All mixes are compared and analysed using the following framework as per the research arguments developed above:

• The ‘four dimensions’ of mixing (see Appendix 1.5)

• Sonic footprint

• Artistic interpretation

• Emotional transference

These four reference points provide for a useful range of analytical comparisons, while explicitly accessing varying forms of listening. This is intended to also illuminate any tangible differences between ITB and OTB systems while mixing various styles of music. Mix analysis was conducted well after the various mixes were completed; this was facilitated by Lebler’s (2005) critical listening process and allowed analytical listening methods described in Moylan (2002) and Izhaki (2008). Moylan and Izhaki clarify their critical listening applications via diagrams (see Figures 1 and 2 below) on the subject of stereo field and space positioning.

Chapter One: Introduction 8 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Figure 1: William Moylan’s perceived performance environment (2002, p. 52)

Figure 2: Roey Izhaki’s stereo mixing concepts (2008, p. 66)

The use of these concepts aided in the analysis of each mixing system by comparing and contrasting the variances in sonic footprint and artistic interpretation. This analysis then discusses creative practice and leads to a subjective opinion of preference, which is then left for the reader /listener to judge further.

3. Practice-based approaches

Every mix is unique: My methodology is based around the concept that every song is a unique piece of art and this aligns with my professional practice to date. Every mix has to be treated with an individual approach. Every song requires a mixing process that enhances the individual personality of the song and by seeking that ‘ideal’ sonic footprint. Every song should have its own personality or as I like to say ‘be its own animal’. This is where I posit that my Stairways mixing process is vital: it leaves

Chapter One: Introduction 9 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven good production alone, yet recognizes where inexperience may need to pay more attention and incorporate new learning as projects progress over time.

Production styles of music and their influence on mix system design: As part of my process I believe that it is important to be centrally aware of often ‘common traits’ that the listener is accustomed to for certain styles of music. Some examples from past eras would be in say, the relentless use of the AMS RMX16 non-linear reverb patch on snare drums throughout rock songs of the 80s and beyond; the use of echo chambers and tape delay in the 50s and so on. I strive to recognise these connections and therefore plan for how to achieve these in the track so it suits the style. I also identify these constants via the Stairways process when listening to the artist’s references, and through communication with the producer.

The mix system: I suggest that simply buying the latest equipment is no substitute for experience and knowledge. Mixerman (2010) reinforces this, “gear used on a mix are tools that will make your life either easier or more difficult; they are not what makes a mix good or bad” (p.157). Nonetheless, it would seem that many mixers are very specific about their equipment and as is constantly described in many trade magazines. To be specific then re. the particular tools: the mixes for this project were completed at my home facility; for the OTB mixes I used a 26-output hybrid system because this is reasonably consistent with a mid-level professional recording studio. A complete list of studio equipment and OTB and ITB system flexibility is attached in Appendix 1.4. Appendix 1.1 also further details a mix philosophy that many professionals use. This philosophy, combined with mix system design is of particular importance in this dissertation because it is central to my practice. It should be clear that both mix systems used in this thesis use analogue outboard equipment and are by definition hybrid systems, the main difference in mix system application is the ‘summing process’ (ITB or OTB). The superiority of digital or analogue summing is contested greatly on Internet blog sites and this will add another concept for analysis later in this thesis.

Creative processes, language and the narrative: Throughout each of the mix cycles, a detailed journal was recorded in order to identify positive, negative and as yet undetermined aspects of the various sessions. For example, it was useful for many insights during the mixes following into how the ITB system is far more visually orientated in what historically has been an auditory dominated practice. By contrast, working and ‘performing’ on the console requires few visual cues and where I found

Chapter One: Introduction 10 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven the best moments to be mixing and listening with the eyes closed. Related research (Thompson & McIntyre, 2013) investigates theories of understanding how a creative person’s unconscious knowledge of their system enhances creative output, while Wolpert (2000) concludes that listeners do not hear the same as professionals in a musical sense; the mixer must also process the consumer listening experience when mixing. Even now with the rise of the DAW and the acceptance of automation, practitioners like Daniel Lanois (2008) support my analogy of the mixing process as similar to instrumental performance. This includes multiple styles of listening as Lebler (2006) discusses how one might use two listening environments – ‘in the moment’ and ‘out of the moment’ (unconscious vs. conscious) to gain deeper critical understanding.

Overall, my creative journal has been central to unpacking the processes and problems as directly related to the research questions outlined above. Consequently these entries appear in each stage of the process. More central to the framing of the central dissertation components (as described in Chapters Two, Three and Four below), this language is ‘drawn across’ from the journal entries to be positioned as an authentic narrative and which necessarily rests upon colloquialisms and working terminologies as commonly used in the profession.

Dissertation structure

Chapter Two. Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music: A comparison of stairway designed analogue and digital processes. The Chapter addresses how the production of AC music has an influence on mix design, creative practice and sonic footprint. The Stairways findings for the sessions are tabled. Two AC tracks are then mixed ITB and OTB with insights into practices and sonic footprint compared.

Chapter Three. Finding ‘The Beat’: Mixing Electronic-based Popular Music. A comparison of analogue and digital processes is presented to discuss the variance in EL production and mixing by prominent artists. The Stairways process is again tested where this style of music varies greatly from that of AC. Two EL tracks are mixed ITB /OTB and the results are again compared.

Chapter Four. Creative Processes: Designing an Individualised Mix System for Popular Music Styles. In this Chapter I adapt the Stairways process to design a mix approach for two songs by the same artist, again mixed ITB and OTB. The mixes are

Chapter One: Introduction 11 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven compared as if on the same album. To broaden the scope this process was also employed for an additional artist (providing four mixes in total).

Chapter Five. Findings and Conclusions. An overview of the project is drawn together before the research questions are reviewed and summary findings provided. The Chapter concludes with an argument for future research possibilities.

CD Portfolio of Works. The 18 recordings are central to this submission and demonstrate both sonic achievements and comparisons between the artist rough mixes and outcomes of various OTB versus ITB techniques.

Appendices 1-18. The appendices are a resource of supportive material that are designed to give the reader a detailed understanding of the mix practices, their design and underpinning assumptions for both professional practice and research design.

Concluding remarks

The mixing process is one small important piece of the complex puzzle that represents popular music record production and the importance of the song its performance and production practices in delivering a quality result should be understood. However, the art of mixing popular music is a relatively new discipline and only quite recently are scholarly sources becoming more available (for example, in the work of The Association for the Study of the Art of Record Production, 2014). More commonly however, it is usual to find producer, mixer and technical opinions in the trade magazines (and perhaps dubiously accompanied by product placement), weblogs, and via interviews and other less rigorous contexts. In parallel, I have developed and used the Stairways process for approximately ten years now, but perhaps like many mix practitioners, I have found much of the available information leaves the reader with a state of frustration and/or a lack of empirical evidence.

This dissertation therefore seeks to address ‘the field’ in varying ways, and at the very least by way of a thorough documentation of this mixer’s professional work via practice-based research design. It aims to contribute to that growing body of knowledge as outlined above. This framework includes a broad spectrum of mixing- related phenomena including the evaluation and comparison of sonic outputs (included on CD), creative practice, ideas about ‘emotional transference’ and various mixing rationales. By approaching this topic from a practice-based perspective it is also hoped any mixer – be they bedroom or professional – may benefit from at least one aspect or another of the project. The dissertation presents a ‘tangible memory’ or

Chapter One: Introduction 12 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven typology of what various Stairways designed systems may offer when mixing differing styles of popular music – the aim of which is to help the mixer understand the variance of creative practices across different systems, and the influence this may have on striving for one’s own sonic footprint.

Chapter One: Introduction 13 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Chapter Two

Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music: A Comparison of Stairway Designed Analogue and Digital Processes

A spectrum of AC-styled music might include artists such as The Foo Fighters, Bon Iver, and Karnivool. These are three contrasting styles of music (rock, easy listening folk, progressive rock,) and each involves varying production and recording approaches. The production and resultant mix imagery can be heavily influenced by stylistic consistencies; folk and rock influences are discussed in Appendix 2 to evaluate the influence of AC styled production on the mixing process and describes how the production styles of AC music influence mix system design. This Chapter continues with a mix session of two AC styled songs mixed ITB and OTB and these mixes will be compared and analysed in relation to sonic footprint and creative practices. The following sections outline the Stairways methods used for each OTB and ITB mix of two AC-styled tracks which I term ‘alternative folk’ (artist 1) and ‘heavy alternative rock’ (artist 2).

Artist 1: The Phoncurves, Lover (Alternate Folk)

The Stairways and Gateway Key tables for this song are contained in Appendix 1.2 and 1.3. A brief summary of this application is as follows:

Stairway 1: (Who is the mix for?) The mix is for the artist, their management, and promotional company. The mix would need to please all and therefore must incorporate the artist’s vision and be a saleable product for market suitability. Stairway 2: (Understand how mix systems and equipment generate their sound). This track requires experience in the application of vintage-sounding technology and a mix system that provides warmth, depth and clarity in many sonic areas. Stairway 3: (Understand that the song and its production are essential). The artist’s vocal production is excellent, but the production as a whole lacked clarity in engineered sounds. The song form is strong. Stairway 4: (Use artist’s references). Sea Lion Woman, Feist (2007). This reference provides much inspiration: the driving, organic yet ambient drum sound, the use of contrasting vocal sonics between lead vocals and backing

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music 14 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

vocals. The organic nature of guitar parts and a sonic footprint that at times is artistically over compressed. There is a wonderful spatial separation (front to back) and emotionally the track entices the listener to become lost in pulsing synchronicity with its driving yet fragile nature. Stairway 5: (Listen to the rough mix and analyse it.) The artist mix was generally poor (CD portfolio track 1); much work to do. Gateway Key: (Design and experience). Refer to Appendix 1.3. The production warranted a further equalization contrast between the ‘AM’- styled (old radio) backing vocals and the more modern sounding lead vocals, however, the voice still required an element of vintage originality. The vocal production on this track was reasonably good, but I could tell from the artist mix and their references that the track warranted continual contrast between mono /stereo and front to back spatiality. The reference track supported this. The drums needed more depth to them: the kick was weak and there was no snare track because the artist requested a driving but roomy drum sound. Therefore, I decided to use the mono room microphone as the centre /snare microphone to determine the amount of centre image there was to the drum sound. The one arrangement area that the track was weak on was in the bridge /breakdown – this needed some creative influence to work in with the song’s artistic interpretation. I decided to add production to the bridge.

The mix needed to satisfy the artist’s vision but ensure radio suitability for the manger and promoter. I then designed and setup my mix system (see Appendices 3 and 4), walked away, and returned the next day to begin.

Comparisons of the OTB and ITB mixes for Lover

Journal notes available at Appendices 3 and 4; CD portfolio tracks 2 and 3.

The Phoncurves Lover Analysis

Four dimensions of mixing Most differences in the four dimensions are to do with volumes of various parts. The OTB mix sounds wider because of this: louder volume of an out of phase part. The only dimension in which there is an obvious difference is the height (overall equalization.)

Sonic footprint OTB mix is warmer (100hz), the ITB mix has more midrange

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music 15 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

(1kHz) and top end (10kHz). There is also more distortion on the lead vocal and this facilitates a more focused middle image in the OTB mix. When considering mix compression mixers utilize the term ‘glued’2. A mix needs to feel like one collective thing: remember, ‘one animal’ – yes it is alive (or it should be). I feel there is virtually no difference between the compression of these two mixes, I used the same external compressors on all pillars discussed in Appendix 1.1; any difference in compression sound is very minimal and not a result of the mixing system.

Artistic interpretation There is much more effect on the vocal in the ITB Mix. This affects the interpretation of the song greatly. I prefer the edgier drier vocal of the OTB mix. This leads to a major finding in this chapter: the lack of inspiration mixing the same song twice (Discussed later). The fact that the OTB mix has a fuller warmer sound adds to the power of the rhythm section and the driving nature of the drum feel. This alone makes this version contrast with the more edgy distorted vocals and adds to the more personal feel of this mix.

Emotional transference The emotional transference in this song is derived primarily via the song, its performance and the production of the recording. The only aid the mixing process had with emotional transference was coming up with the idea of editing a double chorus onto the end of the mix the development of the bridge production via the addition of the reverse tape delay effect on the piano, and in the relationship between the vocals and the rhythm section. In these mixes the lead vocal is dryer in the OTB mix and this makes the track feel more personal.

Table 1: Analysis and comparison, Lover.

Preliminary findings re. the Lover mixes

Upon commencement of my methodological process, two insights became apparent:

• Mixing a song twice in immediate succession does not facilitate a creative practice on the second mix. I did not change creative choices during the ITB mix,

2 ‘Glued’ is a descriptive word used in audio circles. When a mix is glued, it is sounding like it is combining all parts into one collective sound. Usually this is a term utilized when discussing compression and balance.

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music 16 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

I just used what had been done the day before. I wonder if I would have come up with the same creative ideas had I mixed ITB first, for example, changing the arrangement and editing a double chorus at the end, the new kick drum sound, or the reverse piano delay. There were no new inspirations during the ITB mix process, and this must be considered as detrimental to this methodology because the mix analysis tests creative output as well as sonic footprint.

• My ability as an ITB mixer needed to be enhanced to make this a true comparison of mix system and not a study into my lack of ITB mixing abilities. I spent a few hours becoming familiarized with the ITB framework and the complexity of the setup I had created (in essence, replicating an analogue console workflow). I realized that the ITB setup needed to be improved and equalizers made available on all auxiliary masters (they needed to be there in case I wanted to use them, like an analogue console). This would negate the laboriousness of having to halt the creative process to divert and re-set (Gateway Key).

The Stairways process developed mix imagery that determined ITB and OTB mix system design; there is no doubt that the mixes sound different. The OTB mix sounds warmer and this suits the style of music. Is this a direct result of the equipment? Possibly – surely that is why we use analogue consoles, to impart colour? I also believe that both of these mixes could be used for release, but I did a better mix on the system I was used to. If I practiced more ITB, It may be possible to adjust procedures for a better outcome. However, I do not find ITB plugin adjustment intuitive (using a mouse) and this limited any sense of ‘flow’ I may have otherwise enjoyed. However, the Stairways process provided OTB and ITB mix systems that generated a ‘releasable’ product for this style of music. Final point: I need to become more familiar with the ITB setup to improve the creative practice of future mixes. I need to do the mixes with a layoff period between them to allow for more creativity on the second mix.

Artist 2: Dave’s Pawn Shop (DPS) Requiem (Heavy Alternative Rock)

Stairways and Gateway Key tables for this song are available at Appendices 1.2 and 1.3. Brief summaries are as follows:

Stairway 1: (Who is the mix for?) The mix is for the artist and needs to align artistically to the reference tracks.

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music 17 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Stairway 2: (Understand how mix systems and equipment generate their sound). This track requires experience in the application of hard hitting rock sounding equipment and a mix system to deliver this. Stairway 3: (Understand that the song and its production are essential). The song’s production was adequate; the engineering was of reasonable standard. The song is strong and the instrumentation production is very strong. The melody grabs you as a great track ready to be unleashed. Stairway 4: (Use artist’s references). ‘Wasted’, Metz (2003). This track gave a wonderful insight into the artist’s vision: the ‘overcooked’ (compressed) sound of the entire mix, the sonic footprint being squashed to force the listener to experience the power of the drums and guitars. The use of over compression places the listener within a space of anguish, almost struggling to get out. The vocals are very low in the mix so as to not detract from the power of the track. The bands other reference were various tracks by Nirvana in which the use of melody sat within a powerful rock tune. There is much to be inspired by here. I used these notes to generate mix imagery of the song I was to mix, and applied similar techniques using equipment I felt suitable. Stairway 5: Listen to the rough mix and analyse it. The rough mix was reasonable but lacked power. (CD portfolio track 4). Gateway Key: (Design and experience). Refer to Appendix 1.3 I was so impressed the first time I heard this song that I went to the band and told them I wanted to mix it for free. This tune showed so much potential: it had a bass line (and sound) that drove the track, a wonderful melody, vocal delivery, and guitar power that just needed to be unleashed. The song inspired me, not from what was recorded but from what I heard in my head as a vision for the mix. I had a good understanding of the band’s influences (Nirvana, Metz) and where the song needed to be turned into ‘a beast’, the guitars to cut through but have the power to match the dominance of the bass. When I reviewed the session I noticed there were many guitar tracks in this recording, therefore, I decided they needed as many analogue outputs as possible – this would minimize the digital summing effects. Mixerman supports my practice here: “The more audio tracks that are summed digitally the more choked the audio gets” (2010, p.171).

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music 18 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

I knew immediately that the drum sound was lacking power and the foundation of the track was being let down by poor sounds. The foundation of the track needed to be developed (drums, bass), then the mix could support the power of the guitars, the bass would drive the song, allowing Jake’s wonderful vocals to create an inspiring rock anthem. As per my convention, I designed the OTB mix system, set it up, and came back the next day to mix (see Appendices 5 and 6). Following the first Phoncurves ITB mix process for Lover, I decided that all auxiliary masters required equalizers, ready for use. This should enhance the creative practice of the mix.

Comparisons of the OTB and ITB mixes for Requiem

Journal notes available at Appendices 5 and 6; CD portfolio tracks 5 and 6.

DPS Requiem Analysis

Four dimensions of mixing Dynamics over time. The OTB mix definitely kicks into the chorus more. Has better fader rides resulting in a more dynamic mix. The OTB mix sounds wider and clearer, this is especially noticeable in the choruses and outro as the electric guitar sound is far superior and louder in this mix. I struggled to achieve a suitable electric guitar sound during the ITB mix. The ITB mix has an over compensated low frequency response (100Hz). I could not achieve a bass tone I was happy with via plugins. During the OTB mix I drove3 the desk pre amp to achieve the tone I wanted, whilst mixing ITB I did know this and I had a tangible memory of how the bass should sound, I just could not achieve the same tone with plugins

Sonic footprint The balance is the biggest difference between the two mixes. The ITB mix does not sound as ‘glued’. This is not a result of mix buss compression but balance: I have achieved a poor balance in the ITB mix, the snare is sticking out at times and does not sound one with the kit, the bass is loud in the verses and quiet in the choruses. The guitar sound is not inspiring.

Artistic interpretation My subjective opinion is that the OTB mix is much better balanced and presents a more powerful transference of the recording. It is also clearer, less muddy in the bottom end (180Hz) and has an edgier personality to it. This superior dynamic representation of the OTB mix seems to represent a

3 To ‘drive’ is a term that represents overloading a device to the point of distortion for sonic appeal.

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music 19 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

song that feels more alive.

Emotional transference When comparing emotional transference I listened to the tunes all the way through: as a whole. This was a development of my methodology from ‘The Phoncurves’ mixing analysis. The OTB mix facilitates a superior emotional experience for the listener.

Table 2: Analysis and comparison, Requiem

Preliminary findings re. the Requiem mixes

During this mix session two major insights became apparent:

• ITB mixing is not a suitable practice for me to mix heavy rock. When I was trained as a mixing engineer I was taught about gain staging, this is the principle of running optimum level into pieces of equipment. When mixing in DAWs gain staging is also very important and very different. Often inexperienced operation can result in tracking audio far too loud, and this can result in poor plugin sonics and buss overload. Therefore, at the outset of every mix I go through every wave file and optimize the amplitude of the wave file using the clip gain function in Pro Tools. This eliminates any known gain stage problems associated with the ITB system. However, whilst mixing this song ITB I found myself frustrated, ‘over tweaking’ (Zak, 2001) while trying to address what I perceived as a choking sound. This came about when I was attempting to balance the multitude of guitar tracks with the drums, bass and synth parts of this song. I felt like for some reason I couldn’t get the mix to ‘breath’ enough and fill the stereo spectrum with the essential ‘power’ needed for the song.

Earlier (p. 2) I reference Mark Stent (cited in Tingen, 2010) stating he prefers to mix rock records OTB as compared to pop records. I support this idea at this stage. In hindsight, I am trying to understand as to why in the ITB mix I didn’t push the guitars up more to drive the song in the chorus and outro; one could speculate this was because the harshness or choked quality of their tone in my ears told my brain not to do this. Was this the result of the digital summing of so many guitar parts? (Gearslutz, 2013; Mixerman, 2010). There needs to be further investigation to begin to answer this more fully.

• The creative process is of paramount importance. On page two of this dissertation I proposed that quality mixing might be achieved through a complex

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music 20 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

balance of technological system design, stylistic awareness and creative application. This proposal is supported in the following findings.

My best mixes seem to be like a performance: I don’t think, I just do. The OTB mix for Requiem (CD portfolio, track 5) felt like this at times, where that mix presents a sonic footprint and artistic interpretation that delivers an emotional response (I get goose bumps when listening to the outro). When I mix OTB I don’t look at the equalizer buttons, finding the frequency I want by ear, I boost or cut until it sounds right. When mixing Requiem ITB I had to utilize a mouse and plugins, a sight-dominated and different sensory action from mixing OTB. For me this is a far less creative avenue. The only way to describe how I felt is similar to using my less dominant hand to write. I am right-handed and while I can write with my left, I know I can do so much better with my right and therefore feel anxious and frustrated with my performance when creating ‘left handed’ as it were. When mixing ITB, for me the system (and the Stairways) delivers a less suitable creative process, and the mix sounds unbalanced, feels less alive and does not inspire.

This in no way means it is not possible – like many things musical, practice and repetition will improve technique. A further solution to this could be to use a control surface that allows plugin adjustment via a hands-on approach (utilising a knob to alter settings). However, I would like to speculate that to accommodate my associated needs, the suitable interface to facilitate this appropriately would need approximately 32 faders and four to six pots per channel (for equalizers and effects) at my disposal. The cost of such a unit is many tens of thousands of dollars, this puts it out of reach of most bedroom producers. The possibility to gang a series of less expensive (for example, eight fader-Mackie MCUs) together is an option. However, in my experience (educating bedroom producers as a profession), I am of the opinion there is little chance many of them would consider buying four units for this sole purpose. A more pertinent question is would I buy four Mackie MCUs? No, I would buy a similarly priced analogue console and have both options. I did not feel like I was in a creative process whilst mixing ITB and how much this contributed to the poor mix (CD portfolio, track 6) is as yet inconclusive.

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music 21 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Chapter synopsis

Both Stairways-designed mix systems were capable of producing a suitable release product in the folk orientated AC styled track (The Phoncurves). I am intrigued as to how much of an influence the Waves Non Linear Summing (NLS) plugin used on all auxiliary masters, contributed to the final outcome of the ITB process. This plugin is designed to emulate the ‘colour’ of an analogue console and there are many options for similar products that warrant consideration. However, as the mixer, my creative ‘flow’ was less comfortable operating the ITB mix system (a system I don’t use often). Future research into what younger professionals achieve in a similar scenario having been trained in the reverse order would be most interesting. With only this initial research completed it is nonetheless my conclusion that the ITB system could not achieve the colour and dynamics I wanted for a heavy rock song that has a lot of electric guitar tracks: creatively and sonically, the OTB system would seem far superior in this area. Whether this is because of the summing process is as yet unclear. However I believe I have formulated some evidence (albeit small scale) that OTB mix systems are sonically superior for rock-styled mixing when there is a multitude of heavy electric guitar parts and live drums. This also constitutes support for the idea that the familiarity of a given mix system is imperative to achieving quality results. Following this reasoning, the development of the mixer’s practice and experience (how one was taught, what one has used) is of great importance when designing suitable mix systems and as directly related to the Stairways process.

Stairways delivered good mix imagery from two different mix systems suitable to perform in – my ‘performance’ was better in the OTB system. Overall, mixing the song twice (ITB and OTB) had a significant influence on the creative nature of the second mix, and this process needs to be addressed in further work. If I were to listen as a consumer intent on experiencing an emotional response and focus on that alone, all mixes might be considered acceptable, however, I do not hold the same opinion when listening as a mixer. This proposition leads itself to the possibility of consumer surveys in any future research – an idea also contextualised by Wolpert (2000) when perception abnormalities were discovered between non-musical and musical listeners with well-known songs that had incorrectly pitched vocals. Perhaps this trend could also be carried over into perceptions of mixes.

These theories and findings need to be developed further as one could ask is this related to music style? EL music is a completely different production process and

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music 22 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven demands a fresh investigation. In the next Chapter I therefore adapt my research approach accordingly to focus on EL music and its mix production. This aims to aid further in contextualizing answers to specific areas and present increasingly succinct answers to the Stairways ability in designing suitable but varying ITB and OTB mix systems.

Chapter Two: Mixing Acoustic-based Popular Music 23 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Chapter Three

Finding ‘The Beat’: A Comparison of Analogue and Digital Mixing Processes Within Electronic Music

In the previous Chapter I have assessed the Stairways process by comparing and analysing ITB and OTB mix systems whilst mixing AC-styled (acoustic) music. In this Chapter I will repeat this process utilising electronic music (EL). A broad definition of EL would include records with instrumentation that is largely generated, sequenced and produced inside the computer (and/or with external synthesizers) but with the vocals remaining as the only natural sound sources. With this understanding one could ask – should EL be approached the same way as AC music for mixing purposes or does the variance in production style warrant a different mixing process? This Chapter briefly compares the professional practice of successful EL producers and artists including how they work and which systems they use to generate their sound. This can be viewed with my action research framework at Appendix 7. To contextualise this professional practice within my research I will then mix two tracks ITB and OTB and again compare and analyse the results. The following sections outline the Stairways methods used for each ITB and OTB mix of two EL-styled tracks: Hip Hop and Progressive House from Maximo (artist 3) and Ben Sinclair (artist 4). I will now examine each of these in turn.

Artist 3: Maximo Family (Hip Hop)

The Stairways and Gateway Key tables for this song are provided in Appendix 8. Brief summaries are as follows:

Stairway 1: (Who is the mix for?) The mix is for the artist. He is very set in his ways but is intrigued as to what the OTB system can bring to his mixing process. The mix must present a sonic identity that is aligned with the references. Stairway 2: (Understand mix systems). The bottom end of this style of track needs to be treated by equipment that can maintain fullness below 100 Hz, and compress it to tighten it, whilst maintaining its predominance over the mix. Stairway 3: (Understand song production). The song was well produced and engineered. Hip Hop styles rely on varying factors for song writing prowess,

Chapter Three: Finding ‘The Beat’ 24 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

regardless I felt this track was reasonably strong in production, engineering and song writing. Stairway 4: (Use artist references) Tyrese, Fireworkz (2011). This track provided great insight into the artist’s vision. It has wonderfully controlled low and high frequencies, there is an enormous amount of auto-tuned vocals, and the production highlights a wonderful balance between the sweetness of melody and darkness of music that is common with this style. This track also shows how front to back spatiality can be achieved by using musical ideas and fragmented subliminal delays to manufacture a depth concept in a mix. I used these notes to generate a mix imagery of the song then to apply similar techniques using equipment I felt suitable. Stairway 5: (Analyse the artist mix). The rough mix is well produced and the session is professionally setup. The vocal production is of a smoother nature to that of the reference however, it is professional and targeting the client’s audience. The track is ready to be mixed. Gateway Key: (Design and experience). My ITB mixing process has been fine-tuned in preparation for this session. I have used the ITB setup for many external mix opportunities that I felt would be suitable following the findings of Chapter Two. I believe my speed and knowledge of the ITB setup is now continually improving. Refer to Appendix 9 and 10.

While the artist mix (CD portfolio, track 7) was reasonably well recorded, arranged, and the performances were strong, I couldn’t help feeling a little dissatisfied. I wasn’t jumping up and down in anticipation to mix the track. Upon listening to the reference track (Fireworkz) a few times I realised that the artist’s track was a lot smoother and less ‘in your face’. Understanding that this smoothness was in fact the artist’s intention, I decided in contrast to ‘roughen’ the sound of the track. I felt the track needed to ‘jump out’ a little more so I planned to drive sounds during the mix a little to add character and attitude. This would create a compromise between the edginess of the reference and the smooth intentions of the artist. The smoothness of the vocal performance would always maintain that character for the track, but the sonic footprint for the song needed expansion to a point where a more overdriven sound would be subliminally perceived. The mix I was planning should be a lot more ‘present’ than the artist mix.

Chapter Three: Finding ‘The Beat’ 25 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

The beat and bottom end of this recording drives the music along but the vocal production is wonderfully intrinsic yet soothing and imperative to getting the track sounding right. There is also a definitive mono-stereo comparative mix issue that needs to be addressed here. The rhythm and lead vocal occupy the centre space so that all keyboard production and backing vocal production can occupy the left and right fields. Spatiality can often get lost in translation in amateur mixing and especially in Hip Hop styles where many just focus on the beat and its bottom end. It is the contrast to the side material that emphasizes this central prominence. Spatiality is described very well in Moylan (2002) and Gibson (2005) and this informed my vision of the song prior to mixing. I then designed and set up my mix system, (see Appendix 9 and 10) and returned to mix on the following day.

Comparisons of the OTB and ITB mixes for Family

Journal notes available at Appendices 9 and 10; CD portfolio tracks 8 and 9.

Maximo Family Analysis

Four dimensions of mixing ITB and OTB mixes have a more prevalent front to back and left to right image than the artist’s rough mix. Both mixes have a more forward representation (they feel more in your face). The height of both mixes (frequency range) is definitively larger than the rough mix, there are a lot more low (100Hz and below) and high frequencies (8kHz up). The OTB mix sounds more forward, deeper and wider than the ITB mix.

Sonic footprint There is more bass in the OTB mix however the standout for me is that the OTB mix seems ‘glued’ and has a lot more out of phase information that leaves the listener with a perception of space. The vocals in general are a little more forward and the backing vocals a little louder in this mix as well. When I did a blind review with the artist, he came to the same conclusions as I. He is strictly a bedroom producer who mixes all of his own songs completely ITB, but he preferred the OTB version.

Artistic interpretation The biggest difference between the two mixes is that the OTB mix has that ‘collective’ feeling to it. It is hard to attribute that to anything other than the process of analogue summing or my performance on the day. Both of these mix versions have the edgier tone and a more upfront sound presenting a more ‘in

Chapter Three: Finding ‘The Beat’ 26 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

your face version’. I also believe that the ITB mix is suitable for release as it would be a negligible percentage of the target audience who would hear any difference in these two versions, especially after mastering has occurred.

Emotional transference The emotional transference in this song is derived primarily via the beat and the vocal production, both have been enhanced and made slightly more aggressive to achieve a sweet and sour combination that combines really well. The vocalist’s style and the actual sounds used for the rhythm section are quite sweet sounding however by exaggerating their qualities and pushing equipment to its limits I have created a more present and in your face (subliminally sour) representation than the artists mix. Therefore, the Stairways process facilitated my vision and brought to life the results sought in both mix systems.

Table 3: Analysis and comparison, Family.

Preliminary findings re. the Family mixes

After nearly a year of continual practice to develop my ITB mixing I believe a number of realisations are becoming clearer:

• For optimum results, the mixer’s creative practice needs to be uninhibited by the technical process of the mix system. In all but heavy rock genres this seems to far outweigh a preference towards the sonic characteristics of OTB or ITB mix systems. For the Maximo sessions I mixed ITB first and halfway through I decided to make more of the drum loop in the breakdown parts of the song at 00:55 and 02:02 respectively. Not only did this decision keep the track moving, it also allowed for the opportunity to distort another sound. I made this decision ‘on-the-fly’ during the ITB mix; this creative idea came during this process and not from the Stairways framework. This suggests comfort in my ITB mixing practice and supports the literature of Mixerman (2010) and Zak (2001) re. the importance of being in a conducive environment whilst mixing. The ITB method is a creative method, however to facilitate this the user must be of suitable experience to ensure a clear mind to allow a channel for creativity to enter the process. Compared to the DPS ITB mix (CD portfolio, track 6), I did not feel any sense of unnecessary ‘overtweeking’ Zak (2001) and achieved results

Chapter Three: Finding ‘The Beat’ 27 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

quickly. In fact I found the whole process so fluid that I finished the entire mix in a little under four hours. Stairways had delivered two systems that were conducive to my practice; however, I had also improved as an ITB mixer.

• When mixing OTB the next day I was much more excited about having to do a second mix. As noted in the journal, this mix came together in record time and I was inspired to push the desk harder to see how it compared to the waves NLS summing plugin I used on the ITB mixes (it is common for me to spend ten hours on a mix until my creative side tells me it is done). The balancing only took 40 min and after a bit of gain structuring and track rides there was little to do other than focus on the bottom end of the track. This mix took even less time than the ITB at around two and a half hours. The fact that these mixes came together so quickly is a credit to the artist because they were tracked superbly.

• The sound of the two mixes is relatively similar: yet again personal preference is a subjective issue, depending upon creative experience, the artist’s preference and my subjective choices. While I still believe that the OTB version is slightly superior here, I do not feel I would be compromising my professionalism at all if I had to mix this style ITB with my outboard equipment. One could then ask: how much is the quality of my outboard equipment adding to the process? I would suggest that this makes a significant contribution and that is why professionals around the world still prefer to use outboard equipment on the mix buss, vocals, bass and drums (or as I call them ‘the five pillars’, see Appendix 1.1). The Stairways process has designed an ITB and OTB mix system that both deliver a commercial-ready product.

Notes for future reference

The fact that I have developed my ITB ability has been paramount to the success of the ITB mixes. I have now designed a ITB session template complete with preferred bussing and plug-ins, where I then load session audio directly and adjust a few parameters prior to mixing. This removes much of the laboriousness of ‘mouse-ing’ out of the process and increases the creative potential for the subsequent mix.

Artist 4: Ben Sinclair ‘Elements’ (Progressive House)

The Stairways and Gateway Key tables for this song are available in Appendix 8. Brief summaries of the song evaluation are as follows:

Chapter Three: Finding ‘The Beat’ 28 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Stairway 1: (Who is the mix for?) The mix is for the artist, and possible club or dance music airplay. It must align with the reference track sonic identity. Stairway 2: (Understand mix systems). This track has a definitive electro style to it with driving bottom end. The equipment used for this needs to ensure the clarity of high frequencies ‘crispness’ and bass frequencies ‘size’. Stairway 3: (Understand song production). The track was very well produced, programmed and engineered. It was ready to be mixed. Stairway 4: (Use artist’s reference). Ilan Bluestone, Spheres (2014). This reference presented a sonic footprint for a style of music I do not listen to a lot. The frequency response was compared regularly with my mix; the use of side chain compression is instrumental in the artistic delivery of this song and accentuates how important this aspect is. This track also provides examples of reverbs I do not necessarily like the sound of, mainly because they tend to sound ‘manufactured’. Yet this also presents a wonderful computer related feel, a processed perception of depth spatiality. The track seems to take the listener away on an ever-progressing journey, delivering one to foot-tapping destinations and feelings of freedom. I used these notes to generate imagery of the song I was to mix, and applied similar techniques using equipment I felt suitable. Stairway 5: (Analyse the artist mix). The artist mix was exceptional. Gateway Key: (Design and experience). Of greatest importance to this track is in the enormous amount of side chain compression used. I decided to attempt to mix with none of the composer’s side chain tactics and use my own. However this proved to be a mistake and I quickly learned that this process is much better suited to the production stage and is an integral part of the (ITB) programming and song composition process. Refer to Appendices 11 and 12.

Upon listening to the artist’s mix of this track I couldn’t help feeling that all it needed was mastering. I heard nothing that I felt needed to be changed. However this also offered a tremendous challenge to the Stairways process and my skill as a mixer. In 24 years of mixing I have not mixed an electronic track like this, nor in the traditional ‘third party’ mixing method (Clearmountain, CLA et al.). I subsequently decided to obtain the session from the artist without his side chain compression and attempt my own variations to alter the sound of the mix. This was a complete failure. As noted in the journal notes, I stumbled around for hours trying to get the track to

Chapter Three: Finding ‘The Beat’ 29 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven pump away and in the end was disheartened, as after about four hours the mix was not coming together. I walked away.

Researching further into the professional practice of successful EL producers and artists (for example, Deadamau5) I began to understand that side-chain compression was actually something that spawned the artist’s enthusiasm during the early compositional processes. It therefore became integral to the outcome of the song, almost like a ‘part’ that the musician had written; it delivers ‘feeling’ by supplying the listener with a sense of movement. I made a decision to swallow my pride (as one often has to do as a mixer) and use the side chain compression from the original session. Things then automatically became a lot easier.

Comparisons of the OTB and ITB mixes for Elements

Journal notes available in Appendices 11 and 12; CD portfolio tracks 11 and 12.

Ben Sinclair, Elements Analysis

Four dimensions of mixing The artist’s mix (AM) is equally professional. All three mixes have similar characteristics. The only perceived differences in these parameters are a result of varying balance characteristics of each mix. (E.g. a louder kick drum).

Sonic footprint The AM is superior in all aspects of sonic footprint and supports the industry trend whereby composers mix as they program. It sounds more ‘glued’ and is better balanced than both of my mixes.

Artistic interpretation I am convinced that a third party mixing framework may work very well in some instances of this styles of music. When comparing the OTB mix to the AM at 2:50 there is a volume ride on an arpeggio synth part in the OTB mix that is not present in the AM mix. This volume ride leads to more movement in the mix and adds to the artistic output of the track. There are numerous examples of this type of occurrence with these mixes. So perhaps the artist is at risk, like his AC counterparts, of becoming too close to the track to mix it to its greatest potential.

Emotional transference Side chain compression creates a throbbing pulse like representation of the track to which the listener is drawn and enticed to tap, nod or move in sync with. The side chain compression in the session was exceptional, and the primary

Chapter Three: Finding ‘The Beat’ 30 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

source of emotional transference of this track.

Table 4: Analysis and comparison, Elements.

Preliminary findings re. the Elements mixes

• In electronic genres, side chain compression may be part of the compositional process. Side chain compression and ‘pumping’ is responsible for a lot of the emotional transference in this music style and this particular element does not necessarily require a separate re-mix stage.

• Preferences for equipment are important but experience seems more valuable to the mixer. Ben Sinclair mixed ITB using Ableton Live and plugins that are freely available on the Internet. I mixed it in a $100,000 studio with equipment that many people dream of – yet his mix was better than mine. I believe something of great importance is becoming apparent here. Various pieces of equipment are chosen for their sonic attributes and there will always be differences in sound from one piece of gear to the next, but as mixers we operate through that equipment and adjust settings to produce the sound we desire. The important aspect of choosing equipment is in understanding how it will aid in delivering the mixer’s vision and even more important is the experience to have the appropriate vision for the song. Ben has years of experience in this style of music, I have none. I would love to see what Ben could do should he have access to quality equipment. However, it is interesting to note in his comments with regard to the use of external outboard and a possible personality trait of his demographic as, “… too lazy to try” (Sinclair, 2014).

In this mix session the Stairways process delivered systems capable of release quality mixes, however similar to Deadmau5’s process, I feel it is obvious that the artist needs to be the driving force behind all mixes in this style of music because much of it is done at the compositional stage.

Chapter synopsis

After much contemplation, this research project appears to be confirming a pertinent point: the importance of designing an individualized system and process that the mixer feels necessary to create within. Using the findings I gathered from the Ben

Chapter Three: Finding ‘The Beat’ 31 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Sinclair session, it dawned on me that this type of method might carry across many styles of music. By taking all into consideration – the song, the technology used in the production process, and the mixer’s experience and creative preferences – that what I now term an ‘individualised’ mix process could be developed rather than any technical system for the style of music. The Stairways approach lacks the specificity required to deliver this because the equipment is chosen for appropriateness given my musical vision, but not necessarily from my experience. This is of particular relevance when mixing music styles I formerly considered out of my comfort zone. The creative practice should retain priority over and above the sonic attributes of equipment in most instances.

Of course this process will be different for every individual and song, because many mixers have had varying experience and on vastly different equipment and musical styles. There will be consistencies in equipment use but the uniqueness of a personalised practice seems a more appropriate method to generate the best result in a mix of perhaps any form of popular music. To facilitate this further, the mixer may indeed use the Stairways process as a starting point to identify stylistic expectations and characteristics to then consider their experience and creative needs. The design of this concept may suit any individual mixer from any background. It verifies what is needed artistically within a mix and then aids the mixer to build a system accordingly. This idea of ‘individualised mix practice’ will be developed further in the following Chapter.

Chapter Three: Finding ‘The Beat’ 32 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Chapter Four

Creative Processes: Designing an Individualized Mix System for Popular Music Styles

This dissertation has explored Stairways-based mixing rationales for both AC and EL styles of music; it has compared results from ITB and OTB mixes and formulated some preliminary findings in relation to creative practice, sonic consistencies and mix design. To develop this research further I will now integrate an industry focus into the project. It is commonplace for musicians to release recordings as a ten-song album, or five-song EP. These songs stand together as a single piece of art-work that the musician (and producer) have created as a representation of a shared musical vision. Within such an ‘album’ framework, songs are played one after the other and even though the digitisation of music may be driving the music industry towards a ‘single release’ mentality, the album concept is still a desirable form of marketing for many bands. With this in mind and upon deliberation of outcomes tabled on page 16 of this thesis - mixing a song twice in immediate succession does not facilitate a creative practice on the second mix, I bring a methodological development to this project: I mixed two songs from an artist, one ITB and one OTB. I then analysed the two mixes as if they were to be released side by side on an album. This development contextualises the material within the field of professional practice and helps to answer my third research question: Do Stairways designed mixing systems (OTB, ITB) produce a suitable sonic footprint for varying styles of music?

This process is now applied for two artists (four mixes total). Music style is varied to broaden the research scope: one artist is alternate folk based (Aquilla Young) the other indie electro (Creature Kind). The purpose of this final comparison is to compare the mixes as creative stylistic outputs. The mixing sessions outlined in Chapters Two and Three led to an action research cycle because mixing the same song twice was not a optimal means to compare – the second mix regularly drew upon familiarisation and this impacted negatively on new creativity in the second mix. I did not foresee this at the commencement of this project and this development is a result of the action research cycles. Therefore in this Chapter I widen the artistic terms while comparing suitability for album musical consistency, interpretation and stylistic representation. An overlying analysis of creative practice during the mixing sessions continues and this further aids the analysis of appropriate mix system

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 33 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven design. The action research components of this Chapter are detailed at Appendix 13 and include the introduction of ‘individualised mixing practice’.

The individualised practice addresses my greatest weakness within the ITB system: the endless scrolling through tracks to find faders and related equalizers and effects. When doing this I feel like my ‘performance’ is being interrupted. To alleviate this burden I have minimized these very large sessions to 48 tracks: this enabled me to completely understand (quickly) where everything is within the session. I only needed to press a bank button four times on the controller to access all tracks. I have also used equipment (plugins) that I am familiar with their operation and sound characteristics. There are many opinions in the EL music scene that recommend all types of sophisticated soft processors to achieve appropriate sounds. These would be useful in both the Aquilla Young and Creature Kind mixes and include: DMG Equilibrium, Massey CT5 and TD5, Soundtoys, 2C Aether and Heat. I have no experience with these associated tools of the EL and lo-fi styles, so I steered clear of them. I trusted in my ability as a mixer as I learnt with Ben Sinclair’s mix, that to ‘perform’ well I must use an instrument I know. So in preference to using equipment I wished for, I used equipment I knew very well.

Artist 5: Aquilla Young Vagabond, mixed OTB and Tide mixed ITB

The Stairways and Gateway Key tables for these songs are available in Appendix 14. Brief summaries of the Stairways process are as follows:

Stairway 1: (Who is the mix for?) The artist has strong ideas of how they want these two tracks to sound. The sonic identity must be similar to the reference. Stairway 2: (Understand mix systems). Vagabond needs to sound powerful and full resulting in sonic mayhem by the end. A lot of compression is needed to add this power to the mix whilst maintaining dynamic range limits. Tide is to sound lush and deep, like being underwater with many delays and reverbs. Stairway 3: (Understand the song). The songs are both well produced but the engineering is at student level. A lot of fine-tuning of sounds is required. An organ part is required in Tide (I played this). Stairway 4: (Use artist’s references). Lykke Li, Get Some (2010) (for Vagabond). This track served as a wonderful inspiration for the drum sound and overall sonic identity of the track. The drum sound is organic, over compressed and vintage sounding. It uses distortion to promote a presence required to drive the song. The contrasting reverbs and delays on vocals and guitars fill the sonic

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 34 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

spectrum. The vocal is forward in the mix and adds sweetness to the driving ‘Tarantino-like’ sound of the track. Explosions In The Sky, Let Me Back In (2011) (for Tide). This track uses reverbs and delays to add depth and spatiality to contrast to the ‘loop’ like feel of the dry and pulsing drum sound. With melodic infusions and tonal contrast the track draws the listener in to an introspective space where a contrasting and live organic drum part delivers the listener to an empowering feeling of belief and success. Much emotion is experienced from this track, the contrast between the sonic lushness of the guitars and power of the drum part and concluding distorted baritone guitar dominate this artistic presentation. This track shows how dynamics in music production can produce emotive artistic interpretations. I used these notes to generate mix imagery of the song I was to mix, and applied similar techniques using equipment I felt suitable. Stairway 5: (Analyse the artist mix). The artist mixes sound under produced and are not generating enough emotion and dynamics for the songs. Gateway Key: (Design and experience). My ITB mixing process has been simplified and I am now fully prepared. Refer to Appendix 15 and 16.

What became most intriguing before starting the mixes was knowing that these songs had very different personalities: Vagabond was powerful and driving, whereas Tide was lush and needed much spatiality. However, they both required an element of colour to facilitate a rougher texture to the mix. The production and recording during tracking had left these tracks sounding very clean and safe and that needed to change in both mixes. As soon as a mixing engineer hears the word ‘colour’, one automatically thinks of the analogue domain, however plugins are beginning to replicate this very well and I was looking forward to the challenge of colouring both songs with varying mix systems. It is also important to note that the primary colouring equipment I was to use was consistent on all mixes as per the outboard equipment detailed under ‘The Five Pillars’ (at Appendix 1.1). I decided to drive these pieces of equipment rather hard for all mixes in order to distort them in a sweet way, and to create the required amount of colouration I envisioned.

Comparisons of the Vagabond OTB and Tide ITB mixes

Journal notes available in Appendices 15 and 16; CD portfolio tracks 14 and 16.

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 35 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Aquilla Young, Vagabond Analysis OTB, Tide ITB

Four dimensions of mixing Both tracks have comparable dimensions of mixing. There is no difference. However, the ITB mix took twice as long to achieve the desired spatiality I was after. It was a two day mix compared to one day for OTB

Sonic footprint Both mixers sound comparable.

Artistic interpretation I purposely mixed ‘Tide’ ITB first so as to limit any OTB prejudice on my part. The mix took an enormous amount of time to get it to the point where I was satisfied with its artistic representation as a creative mix. I balanced it easily but I found myself being unsatisfied with the clarity of the mix. This resulted in a lot of over tweaking (Zak 2001). The OTB mix happened easily. However, on completion both mixers have a comparable variance in dynamics, depth and height and this deepens the representation of the songs. The added colour added to both mixes was similar and was added primarily through ‘The Five Pillars’ outboard and the new UAD plugins.

Emotional transference The difference between the rough mixes and these mixes is testament to the third party mixing framework. Both mixes present a much more emotional representation of the track than the rough mixes. The two mixes stand side by side perfectly.

Table 5: Analysis and comparison, Aquilla Young

Preliminary findings re. the Vagabond and Tide mixes

• In this style of music (Indie folk) it is possible to achieve similar sonic and artistic results with ITB and OTB mix systems. The mixes stand next to each other very well and sound like they could be released on the same album. However, it took twice as long to get the ITB mix to where I felt was a good artistic representation of the song (CD portfolio, track 16). At times I felt the mix sounded cluttered, non-specific and I had to do multiple volume rides and revisit equalizations and effect types to get the mix to sound how I wanted. The OTB mix was completed easily with no issues arising at all (CD portfolio, track 14). This is an interesting finding because these were extremely large sessions

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 36 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

that had an enormous amount of audio within them. This finding reinforces what was discussed in the Requiem sessions (Chapter Two): digital summing chokes sonic qualities with large track-count sessions.

• As a mixer I find the more integrated sensory practice of the ITB system stifles my decision practice whilst mixing. This statement is now no longer associated with ‘not liking to use a mouse’. When mixing OTB I am often in ‘loop playback mode’ while adjusting outboard gear and console with eyes closed, using only my ears. When mixing ITB it is the constant act of looking at a computer screen that can dominate my sensory intake, and I felt that at times I wasn’t hearing things well. It was as if my head was clouded with information and I found it difficult to have a specific sense of where to go next. Much literature investigates the integration of information that arrives at the brain from the combination of sensory intake and this will be discussed in the final Chapter. Notes for future reference

The Stairways-designed ITB system ran well and for the very first time I felt at home whilst mixing. Bouncing the tracks down to lower track count made the session manageable and apart from the lack of 32 faders that I could ‘perform’ and the endless practice of looking at a screen – I did not miss the process of mixing OTB. The UAD plugins worked very well, and while they did not completely replicate the products they model, they are very useful tools via which to sculpt a mix. The use of UAD plugins has dramatically increased the versatility of my ITB mix system (but acceptable results take longer than far more intuitive OTB console performances).

Artist 6: Creature Kind, I’ll Make You Mine and Forever

The Stairways and Gateway Key tables for these songs are available at Appendix 14. Brief summaries are as follows:

Stairway 1: (Who is the mix for?) I was the co-producer for this track and therefore the mix is for both the artist and myself. The mixes need to be a combination of sonic identity derived from the references and the co producer’s imagery. Stairway 2: (Understand mix systems). I’ll Make You Mine is an up tempo indie pop tune. It needs to sound punchy, have a lot of presence and have the energy to force the listener to tap along. Forever is similar but has a slightly more laid back feel and requires more depth. Again, a lot of compression is needed to

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 37 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

make the drums punchy and allow a point of reference for the tracks to add spatiality to. There should be extensive use of analogue tape delays because these have a more coloured tone than digital delays. Stairway 3: (Understand the song). I was the co-producer of these tunes, so this adds a different complexion to these mixes. The songs themselves are not that strong so as producer there was a lot of added production done to aid the experience for the listener. This proved to be a difficult experience because I felt at times that the tracks were overproduced, and this pre-assumption was not conducive to completing the mixes quickly. Stairway 4: (Use artist’s references). MGMT, Kids (2008) (for both I’ll Make You Mine and Forever). This track combines a monotonous melody with 1980s influenced production and programming. The song has a driving drum feel with gated reverbs and utilizes distortion, mix buss compression and equalization to add a ‘gritty’ texture to what is an overly sweet track. This style of production and mixing helps to add a ‘lo-fi’ like production style. The mix is two- dimensional (no depth spatiality and little dynamics over time) but it relies heavily on the simple transference of melody and infectious beats to generate a sing along type presentation of a rather weak song. Yes, it is uninspiringly wonderful. I used these notes to generate mix imagery of the song I was to mix, and applied similar techniques using equipment I felt suitable. Stairway 5: (Analyse the artist mix). The artist mix had not yet begun to develop the complexities required for a pop-styled track, the production was there but there were many tricks to program with effects to keep the listener interested in what were two pretty average songs to start with. Gateway Key: (Design and experience). These sessions are extremely large. My ITB mixing process has been simplified and I am prepared with what plugins to use. Refer to Appendices 17 and 18.

My primary aim for these songs was that as co-producer I might bring added inspiration to the mixing process. The songs were not strong and the tracks had a feeling of being overproduced. This was not a positive starting point and I spent a day on each song setting the session up for mixing (this process normally takes about two hours per song). During mix setup I bounced a lot of tracks down to stereo files and made some decisions regarding clearing the mix out for added clarity of parts. There were too many ideas in the songs and this cluttered up the production. I was

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 38 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven also interested to hear the results of these mixes because the Aquilla Young sessions had gone so well. I was predicting a strong outcome from both mix setups given that the production of these tracks was influenced by electronic music and my previous research had suggested that this style of music was suitable to both mix systems. Again these tracks needed more colour added to their mixes, this would add some character that represents the indie electro style.

Comparisons of I’ll Make You Mine OTB and Forever ITB mixes

Journal notes available in Appendices 17 and 18; CD portfolio tracks 17 and 18.

Creature Kind I’ll Make Analysis You Mine OTB and Forever ITB

Four dimensions of mixing Both tracks are suitable for release, the mix of I’ll Make You Mine sounds more present. However, it is meant to, the vocal production of this song is far more pop orientated. Forever uses a lot of Vocoder mixed in with the lead spreading it and embedding it in to the mixes. The OTB mix has increased height as a result of additional low (63Hz) and hi frequencies (10kHz). Other than this, the spatiality factor (which is a result of production) there is no audible difference to the mixes.

Sonic footprint The OTB mix of ‘I’ll Make You Mine has more sonic depth in low and hi frequencies (63Hz and 10kHz). This could be addressed at mastering. Other than this the songs sound like they have been mixed at the same studio.

Artistic interpretation It is difficult to comment on this as the co-producer, I am very close to this recording. I believe both mix systems have presented a suitable artistic representation and the two songs stand together well. Again for some reason the ITB mix took a lot longer to achieve a desired output nearly twice as long.

Emotional transference Both of these mixes transfer emotion well, I can’t help but feel the chorus of ‘I’ll Make You Mine (OTB) sits better and feels more glued than Forever (ITB). However once the four on the floor pattern hits in Forever at the end, that mix sits well.

Table 6: Analysis and comparison, Creature Kind.

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 39 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Preliminary findings re. I’ll Make You Mine and Forever

• ITB and OTB mix systems have sonic characteristics that are different, however the mixer works within these systems and adjusts the sound to what they instinctually prefer. These two mixes sound as if they were mixed on the same system, but they were not the same, so how is this possible? The Stairways process helped me create mix imagery and then I designed two individualised mix systems through which to ‘perform’. During these mix sessions I paid particular attention to the sound I was generating through the system. As an analogue console, my Yamaha M1532 adds colour and tonal characteristics, normally a more rounded low frequency response. Whilst mixing these songs I found that I (somewhat instinctively) had to add at least one dB more of 80Hz shelved to the stereo mix equalizer ITB than when I operated OTB. Conversely I found I had to add approximately .5dB of HF(10kHz) to the OTB that was not required during ITB. These observations confirm that my analogue desk does impart a different tone to mixes, however, when mixing ITB I now simply compensate accordingly.

• Beyond the Five Pillars philosophy (Appendix 1.1). Variable internal and external equipment processors were used whilst mixing, but I designed or manipulated those sounds within the equipment’s sound parameters to what I felt appropriate. It was not the equipment’s sound that completely determined the mix. This gives weight to the conclusion that when it comes to mixing there is no best or better equipment, it is all simply ‘different’ and the mixer uses one’s instincts to finesse the desired sonic footprint. The end result is what matters most, and both mix systems enabled me to create an appropriate result. The question that is more relevant to this project is: which system does the mixer feel more comfortable with whilst manipulating a sonic output? I will explore this further in the final Chapter of this dissertation.

• Mixing should be a performance – when the mixer has the ability to engross themselves emotionally within the music and perform with the mix system, the result can often be inspirational. When I took a break from mixing I had a listen to the OTB mix of Requiem (CD portfolio, track 5). This mix has elements of what I am discussing in its final moments – during the outro instrumental section, I ‘performed’ many volume rides to create flowing dynamics that were not present in the original artist rough mix. These dynamics transferred emotion

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 40 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

by enhancing the energy of the mix, like waves of power flowing in and out: again (it gave me goose bumps). Of course it would be logical to conclude my emotional response was a combination of many things: the song, the production and the mix. Perhaps what is most important here is that the flowing dynamics proved to be the final ingredient to accomplish this and without this I believe that there would have been far less emotional transference to the listener.

• The I’ll Make You Mine and Forever mixes are competent and by way of the Stairways process and via a more individualised mix design I have achieved a releasable product with both ITB, OTB systems for both songs. Yet they do not completely inspire. Emotional transference is a combination of many things, but there are moments where mixing practices bring a song and its production to a new level. Therefore I propose that for the mixer to create a mix that is truly inspiring, many things need to align: the song and production need to be exemplary; the mix system needs to meet the criteria of the individualised design principle listed in Appendix 13; and the Stairways process needs to be followed. All of these criteria will allow the mixer to feel free to simply ‘play’ the mix system as if performing, having little or no technical thought – just listening and adjusting sonically, musically and creatively as required. The quality of this performance is the measuring stick for the output of the mix.

• The ITB mix of Forever (CD portfolio, track 18) was a laborious task and there was minimal performance opportunity. This was similar to ITB Tide (CD portfolio, track 16) and both songs took nearly twice as long to mix as their OTB counterparts. This in no way means the mix is ‘bad’ or that the system cannot produce a good result, rather, perhaps this mix was a victim of the ITB ‘chocked’ phenomenon, or that through some design fault, I was not able to let go of technological thought processes such as: what is the kick auxiliary master equalizer and how do I adjust it? This kind of process stops the flow of the mix.. Instead if I were aware of all necessary technological details and could comfortably navigate around the system, a performance-like rationale could be the result. This is where great things can happen and is inspired by many of the professional mixers I have worked with. CLA comes to mind as one who meticulously likes setups the way he has done them for years. He would be the first to complain to an assistant engineer if ‘the vibe’ of the mix was lost.

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 41 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

On individuality

This Chapter has introduced the concept of an‘individualised’ mix design. Experiencing this both ITB and OTB has now convinced me to believe strongly in this theory. Both mixing systems created wonderful results, however both systems were designed specifically for those songs – and for me. Every mixer has a slightly different background, and each requires a completely original mix system to feel completely comfortable. The individualised mix design therefore works hand in hand with the Stairways process, the Stairways process unpacks what the mixer feels is best for the song, and the individualised mix design places the mixer in a system or ‘instrument’ best suited to performance. The mixer’s experience and instinctual preference should claim precedence when designing an appropriate individualised mix system. This becomes more important than the sonic differences of equipment in many cases, because the mixer will intuitively adapt the sound to replicate what their musical vision will dictate. Combining this approach with the Stairways process worked extremely well during the Aquilla Young and Creature Kind sessions and the development of an individualised mix practice has increasingly become central to this project. Overall, this is represented in Figure 3 below:

The Stairways process



The mixer’s artistic Individualised The creative vision for the song. mix system practice.  design Mixing as a performance The mixers  experience and intuitive technology preferences

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 42 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Figure 3: Individualised mix practice.

Chapter synopsis

As a professional mixer I am reasonably happy with all of the mixes examined in this Chapter and as provided in the CD Portfolio of Works. Still, I cannot help but feel that the most important ingredient of these sessions was in my instinctive manipulation of sounds. It cannot be overstated how much the action cycle development of adapting the ITB mix system to a more individualised design for myself has aided in these ideas. When mixing ITB I was comfortable and feeling the best I have with ITB to date; there were sensory perception issues and sonic phenomena (as discussed above), however, I believe that I performed well for one who prefers the size and physical interface of a large analogue console.

All of these elements – as presented in these last three Chapters, in the Appendices and journal entries, and on the CD portfolio of works – will now be drawn together in the following Chapter. In this I will return to begin to answer the primary research questions as posed in the opening Chapter of this dissertation.

Chapter Four: Creative Processes 43 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Chapter Five

Findings and Conclusions

This research is intended as a starting point to expand upon and broaden the scope of scholarly knowledge in the field. The aim of this dissertation was to test whether the Stairways process can design and be responsive to ITB and OTB mix systems, and deliver quality mixes for varying music styles. Chapters Two, Three and Four provide evidence that the Stairways process can deliver suitable mixes in all but for the ITB mix for DPS (CD portfolio, track 6) and for the Ben Sinclair session (CD portfolio, tracks 11 and 12). As a test of placement ‘within the field’ I compared the mixes of these artists to the artists mentioned as references. This comparison is necessarily subjective in nature but the best of the mixes examined in this project sit comfortably within the professional field as release-standard products. In contemplation of the measured success of the Stairways process, the scope of the project should also be considered: six different styles of music, mixed in the same studio by the same mixing engineer, often working outside a ‘comfort zone’, with all but one style achieving what was considered optimum results. In terms of measured success the adaptation of the Stairways method has provided evidence towards its worth – that in order to achieve optimum mixing results across varying styles of music and/or technical systems, Stairways produces an appropriate and highly individualised design. After the preliminary findings and interpretation of the projects examined in Chapters Two, Three and Four, it is now appropriate to propose answers to the questions raised in Chapter One as follows.

1) Does the Stairways process facilitate an appropriate creative vision for various musical styles?

The combination of Stairways one, three, four and five provided me with a solid understanding of the artist’s vision, the appropriateness of the production, the sonic identity and direct influence of references as presented in the artist rough mix. This then educates about what needs to be planned and designed further in order to achieve the artist’s creative goal, what needs to be improved sonically to develop the sonic identity of the track, and finally what additional creative input the mixer may add to bring this vision to life. The OTB mix of the Phoncurves track, Lover (CD portfolio, track 2) is an excellent example of this in action. I had a clear vision for

Chapter Five: Findings and Conclusions 44 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven what the artist was trying to achieve, then went on to design an OTB mix system that would facilitate a optimal mix performance to create a compelling sonic identity, and further by introducing a new song structure (edited double chorus at end) and new production in the bridge in particular. Here I added reverse tape delay to the piano to enhance the space and depth of the mix to contrast with the remainder of the song. The Stairways process together with the action research plan also achieved similar results on DPS (tracks 5 & 6), Maximo (tracks 8 & 9), Aquilla Young (tracks 14 & 15) and Creature Kind (tracks 17 & 18). In sum, throughout this dissertation it has been shown that Stairways has indeed worked well in clarifying a ‘destination’ for the treatment of varying styles of music. This streamlined my performance focus and presented a professional way forward for mix system design and final products in terms of a satisfying sonic footprint. In terms of ‘emotional transference’, this too has had equally pleasing results via artist feedback, early lay-audience reaction and potential commercial distribution providers.

2) What impact do various mix systems have on creative workflow and/or performance practices?

Impact is dependent on personal experience /intuitive preferences and this will be slightly different for every mixer, therefore this research has presented evidence for for the promotion of an individualised mix system. For myself, at the time of writing VDU /computer-based mix systems do not facilitate my own (old school) creativity especially well. No doubt, some mixers may find the reverse (if they are not looking at a screen they may not be comfortable). What is of more importance perhaps is that if the mixer can trust their awareness and experience for what is most likely to give a positive creative result. By doing this, the potential for improved /authentic sonic identity and correspondingly better emotional transference is increased as the mixer may learn much about mixing practices by firstly understanding themselves. The mixer should be completely knowledgeable on how they best ‘perform’ on their instrument (mix system). One example of this was during the Maximo mixes (tracks 8 & 9): I had developed an ITB mix system template where I could easily import session audio. This then located me within an environment where I was more comfortable and which was custom designed according to the Staircase methodology. This resulted in better, faster mixes. As it has been shown in this study, the effect that various mix systems have had on my own performance was firstly determined by my knowledge of that system. However, it has also been

Chapter Five: Findings and Conclusions 45 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven demonstrated that the mixer can increase their knowledge and experience by practicing, moulding and ‘templating’ various approaches to design true multi- system capability.

3) Can Stairways-designed mix systems (OTB, ITB) produce a suitable sonic footprint for varying styles of music?

In Chapter One of this dissertation I discussed how various styles of music have a specific ‘generation of sound’ (p. 2) and this needs to be treated appropriately by the equipment choice for the given mix system. Within this research context, ITB and OTB systems facilitated quality mixes in styles of music with varying ‘generation of sound’ characteristics. The OTB system excelled with large scale mixes and mixes of heavy rock style and it has been shown that mix systems generate associated characteristics in sonic footprint, for example the OTB mix system produces mixes with desirable colouration characteristics. Further, it seems that there are notable links between the development of the mixer’s ‘individualised’ creative practices and the resulting sonic footprint of a mix. As a mixer ‘performs’ better with high skill level, the chances of a mix’s ‘success’ increases and this is often far more important than the equipment chain itself. For example, when mixing progressive house (the Ben Sinclair sessions, tracks 11 & 12) the ITB system used by the artist produced a mix that was superior to anything I could replicate, and in this case that sonic footprint was largely predetermined by the processes inherent within the early compositional system itself (Ableton Live and side-chaining techniques). While my own preference for a given mix system may be relevant for certain styles of music (large sessions, heavy rock etc), but regardless, here it has been shown that all systems may indeed be capable of supporting an ideal sonic footprint.

4) Are certain music styles best suited to particular mixing systems? And if so, why might this be?

There seem to be many contributing factors that inform the answer to this question. Firstly, there is the evidence that for large track-count sessions and acoustically- recorded audio, that the ITB system may be unsuitable (for example, mixing hard rock, as documented in the DPS sessions at Chapter Two). However, there is also the important influence of the mixer’s experience. For example, I would not think it suitable for an inexperienced bedroom producer (ITB /computer DAW) to simply swap and mix larger scale OTB and expect better results: in some situations,

Chapter Five: Findings and Conclusions 46 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven experience and creativity far outweigh the sonic attributes of a given system. Therefore it can be concluded that such ‘artistry’ plays a significant role in the suitability of choice of mix system. This is also the case with EL-styled songs. The familiarity of the processes and software application that the composer uses facilitates appropriate mixing outcomes and this all happens completely ITB. However, the suitability of a sonic direction for a given musical style cannot be analysed without taking into account the mixer’s personal vision (or “imagery”, Zak, 2001) and creative input (Izhaki, 2008). The latter has major implications here: the Stairways facilitated a creative vision for The Phoncurves sessions (Chapter Two, tracks 2 & 3) – my imagery and intuition transformed the mix into a release-quality product compared to the artist’s rough mix (track 1). Further, this was also accomplished in both ITB and OTB systems. Now wiser in hindsight, perhaps a better research question might have been: are certain mixing practices best suited to individual mixers when mixing various music styles? To me now, the answer must be a resounding yes, and this also aligns closely with the opinions of Stent (cited in Tingen, 2010), CLA (Pensado’s Place, 2012), and Manny Marroquin (Tingen, 2012). Perhaps this is why they use different systems: their individualised processes simply demand this, and moreover, ‘one size does not fit all’.

5) Does creative practice affect the sonic footprint of a mix?

Creativity has a central role in all of this: as a mixer more effectively ‘performs’ without technological hindrances within a given mix system, then the outcome of the sonic footprint has the most potential to increase in suitability and overall emotional transference. As it has been shown, the Stairways process and deliberate pre- planning aids centrally in the development and creation of such a conducive operating environment. There is much that needs to be addressed so that the mixer may ‘perform’ well, and if such evaluation and due consideration is carried out effectively, then the mixer’s chances of success dramatically improve. At best, the mixer then truly imagines a sonic identity to strive for. The artist references help design this imagery, the song and its early production aid in achieving a final professional recording, and the mixer’s knowledge of equipment helps design an individualised mix system that promotes a quality performance. Therefore, the quality of creative practice during a mix is one of the final applications that directly affects the generation of a suitable and inspiring sonic footprint.

Chapter Five: Findings and Conclusions 47 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

The individualised mix practice

This dissertation argues findings that facilitate tangible results in the sense that i) this presents a detailed practice that may be adapted and implemented by others, and ii) important creative evidence is provided in the accompanying CD Portfolio of Works. Individualised mix practice uses the Stairways process to design appropriate technical mixing systems (that is, by creating a system that places the mixer in the most appropriate performance context). In this project it has become far more explicit rather than via earlier intuition or professional assumptions – that I was now designing mix systems for both very specific musical circumstances, but also in acknowledgment of my relevant system expertise (not my equipment wishes). An individualised mix practice therefore takes into consideration all of the sonic and creative requirements and presents the mixer with the greatest opportunity to create works that come closer to achieving the ultimate goal: generating an emotional response from the listener. While much online discussion seems to fall into the trap of equipment shootouts, how things ‘sound’ and technical details, conversely, it is proposed here that it is firstly necessary for the mixer to understand themselves and their own creative preferences before relying on equipment specifications. Perhaps by following an individualised Stairways method, mixers may find themselves able to perform within new musical styles once considered alienating, while at the same time expanding and ever refining their techniques and creative processes.

Conclusions and future research

The production and mixing of popular music aims to take the creative vision of an artist and transform that into a tangible form. The mixer’s role is one of the final stages that at its best, brings that vision to life. This dissertation has argued that a balance of technological system design, stylistic awareness and creative application is the key to unlocking frameworks that may deliver optimum outcomes. As a direct result of this research undertaking my practice as a mixing professional has been diversified to what should be considered to be a multidisciplinary process. Many new avenues have been opened that will broaden my mixing comfort zone, expand my client base and increase my prospects for continued longevity in the music industry. The project also raises further considerations as to exactly how ‘creativity’ might work in mix-as-performance settings. Authors such as Csikszentmihalyi (1996), Mcniff (1998) and Tharp (2003) present related theories that, if combined with

Chapter Five: Findings and Conclusions 48 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven practice-based frameworks, might allow far deeper insights into what happens during a mix from the operator’s sensory and emotional perspectives. Further investigation may develop understanding of the phenomenon of generating an emotional response from the listener, similarly to how Sacks (2007) or Levitin (2006) investigate the effects that music has on listeners by unpacking elements of cognitive science in relation to the brain and music. This kind of project may further aid in the understanding of consumer preferences and pave the way to further mix output scenarios tuned more closely to the audience. I believe this was also highlighted through the comparison of some of the ITB and OTB processes investigated in this dissertation (visual versus aural cues for example) and this raises questions regarding combinations of perception and how the brain deciphers this information. One example of this is in the so-called McGurk effect (BBC, 2010) where it would appear that what a person sees directly changes what they hear – using the same audio signal (speech), varying images can alter how the brain perceives audio, at times tricking the listener to hear the wrong word. It may be compelling to examine these same possibilities for what might occur during a mix.

Finally, the concept of mixing as performing continues to intrigue. Further investigation into ideas that perhaps ‘jamming’ with equalization and compression may indeed be similar to say, a guitarist improvising on a pentatonic scale. Authors such as Zukav (1990), Millman (1993) and Tolle (2004, 2005) support an ideal where the mixer can let go, trust and create, where originality is nurtured by being who we are and requiring little effort or contemplation of what others may think. Producers like Rick Rubin emphasise the importance of developing a spiritual focus on one’s own sense of self (cited in Hirschberg, 2007). I put my own creative successes down to knowing myself better, this then aiding in creating more fulfilling results. The more the mixer has a truthful understanding of themselves, the more the possibility to develop an individualised mix practice to perform within, to create the emotional transference we desire, to strive toward that ideal sonic footprint.

Chapter Five: Findings and Conclusions 49 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

References

Anthony, B. (2013). Stairways to mixing heaven: The crafting of creative mix processes for popular music. Unpublished paper. Brisbane, Griffith University.

ASCAP (The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers). (2011). I create music expo. Available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWVJkokLbzQ

The Association for the Study of the Art of Record Production (ASARP). (2014). [online]. Available at http://www.artofrecordproduction.com/index.php/about- arp

Bates, E. (2009). Ron’s right arm: Tactility, visualization and the synesthesia of audio engineering. Journal on the Art of Record Production (4). [online] Available at http://arpjournal.com/1358/rons-right-arm-tactility-visualization- and-the-synesthesia-of-audio-engineering/

BBC (The British Broadcasting Corporation). (2010, November 10th) Try the McGurk effect! Horizon: Is seeing believing? Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-lN8vWm3m0

Brown, J. (2008, 30 July). Mixing outside the lines. Mix Magazine, 32 [online] Available at http://mixonline.com/recording/mixing/mixing_outside_lines

Burgess, R. J. (1997). The art of music production (3rd ed.). London: Omnibus Press.

Buskin, R (1999). Inside Tracks: A first-hand history of popular music from the world's greatest record producers and engineers. New York, NY: Avon Books, Inc.

Claxton, G. (1997). Hare brain, tortoise mind. London: Fourth Estate Limited.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: The psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY Harper Collins.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper Collins.

De Man, B. & Reiss, J. (2013). A semantic approach to autonomous mixing. Journal on the Art of Record Production (8). [online] Available at http://arpjournal.com/2639/a-semantic-approach-to-autonomous-mixing/

Draper, P. (2013). On critical listening, musicianship and the art of record production. Journal on the Art of Record Production (8). [online] Available at

References 50 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

http://arpjournal.com/2630/on-critical-listening-musicianship-and-the-art-of- record-production/

Farinella, D. J. (2006). Producing hit records: Secrets from the studio. New York, NY: Music Sales Corporation.

Flick, U. (2011). Introducing research methodology: A beginner's guide to dong a research project. London: SAGE.

Folkestad, G. (2006). Formal and informal learning situations or practices vs.formal and informal ways of learning. British Journal of Music Education, 23(2), 135- 145.

Kashiwa, G. (2013). Avid-Digidesign technical white paper. [online]. Available at http://akarchive.digidesign.com/support/docs/WhitePaper48BitMixer.pdf

Gearslutz. (2013). The reason most ITB mixes don’t sound as good as analog mixes. [weblog] Available at http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little- time/463010-reason-most-itb-mixes-don-t-sound-good-analog-mixes- restored.html

Gearslutz. (2010). A thread dedicated to Serban Ghenea. Share your thoughts! [weblog] Available at http://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end/529886-thread- dedicated-serban-ghenea-share-your-thoughts.htmlGibson, D. (2005). The art of mixing: A visual guide to recording, engineering, and production. (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson Course Technology.

Hirschberg, L. (2007). The music man. Interview with Rick Rubin. The New York Times, September 2nd 2007. [online]. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/magazine/02rubin.t.html?pagewanted=1&_ r=4&adxnnlx=1188817365-I6USuZkt4xj8V0OYL8ATGA

Hugill, A. (2012). The digital musician: second edition, New York, NY: Routledge.

Izhaki, R. (2008). Mixing audio: Concepts, practices and tools. Oxford, UK: Focal Press.

Katz, B. (2007). Mastering audio: The art and the science (2nd ed.). Burlington, MA: Focal Press.

Katz, M. (2004). Capturing Sound: How Technology Has Changed Music. Berkeley, CA, USA: University of California Press. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com

References 51 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Kerrigan, S. (2013). Accommodating creative documentary practice within a revised systems model of creativity. Journal of Media Practice 14(2), 111-127,

Lanois, D. (2012, March 20th). Daniel Lanois mixing tutorial: Using faders. [online]. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEhIY-TELHI

Lebler, D. (2005). "Get smarter" music: Making knowledge from know-how. In Proceedings of the Effective Teaching and Learning Conference, 4–5 November. Brisbane: Griffith Institute for Higher Education.

Lebler, D. (2006). The master-less studio: An autonomous education community. Journal of Learning Design, 1(3), 41-50.

Levin, I. (2013, 22 January). Critical aspects of high end audio A/D and D/A converters and master clocks design. [online]. Available at http://www.antelopeaudio.com/blog/critical-aspects-of-high-end-audio-ad-and- da-converters-and-master-clocks-design

Levitin, D. (2006). This is your brain on music: The science of a human obsession. New York, NY: Penguin.

Long, S. (2012). 'Flow' and the art of recorded music mixing: Exploration into the world of creative decision making for the mixing engineer. Paper presented at the IASPM-ANZ 2012 Conference, Shifting Sounds: Musical Flow, 5-7 December. Hobart, Tasmania.

Massey, H. (2000). Behind the glass: Top record producers tell how they craft the hits. San Francisco, CA: Backbeat Books.

Mcgahan, G. (2013). Personal correspondence.

McIntyre KC, (2011). Rethinking the creative process: The systems model of creativity applied to popular songwriting, Journal of Music, Technology & Education 4(1), 77-90 Mcniff, S. (1998). Trust the process: An artist’s guide to letting go. Boston, MA: Random House.

Millman, D. (1993) The life you were born to live: A guide to finding your life purpose. Tiburon, CA: H.J Kramer Books.

Mixerman. (2010). Zen and the art of mixing. Milwaukee, WI: Hal Leonard Books.

Mix This. (2014). Bob Clearmountain, professional and personal website. [online]. Available at http://www.mixthis.com/home.html

References 52 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Moorefield, V. (2005). The producer as composer: Shaping the sounds of popular music. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Moylan, W. (2009). Considering space in music. Journal on the Art of Record Production (4). [online]. Available at http://arpjournal.com/1379/considering- space-in-music/

Moylan, W. (2002). The art of recording: Understanding and crafting the mix. Boston, MA: Focal Press.

Owinski, B. (Ed.). (1999). The mixing engineer's handbook. Vallejo, CA: Mix Books

Patagalan, M. (2014) Personal correspondence.

Pensado’s Place (2013). Mix engineer Chris Lord-Alge. Pensado’s Place #80. [weblog]. Available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqZHOrj1VjQ

Polvorinos, J. (Dec 14, 2011). Do ProTools, Nuendo and Logic really sound different? Available at http://jorgepolvorinos.wordpress.com/2011/12/14/do- protools-nuendo-and-logic-really-sound-different/

Robinson, N. G., Bell, C. L. & Pogonowski, L. (2011). The creative music strategy: A seven-step instructional model. Music Educators Journal, 97(50), 50–55.

Robson, C. (2002). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.

Sacks, O. (2007). Musicophilia: Tales of music and the brain. New York, NY: Random House Inc.

Savona, A. (2005). Console confessions: The great music producers in their own words. SanFrancisco, CA: Backbeat Books.

Senior, M. (2011). Mixing secrets for the small studio. Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis.

Schmidt, P, Dockwray, R & A.F. Moore. (2009). The hermeneutics of spatialization for recorded song. Twentieth Century Music, 6(1), 83-114. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/docview/863383963?acco untid=14543 Shaw, Zac. (2013). 21st century recording means less studio time: Deal with it. [online]. Available at http://www.mediapocalypse.com/21st-century-recording- means-less-studio-time-deal-with-it/

References 53 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Sinclair, B. (2014). Personal correspondence.

Smith, H. & Dean, R.T. (2009). Practice-led research, research-led practice in the creative arts. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Snell, Y. (2011). Exploring individuality and musicianship through recording studio- based song-writing. (Unpublished Master of Music dissertation). Brisbane, Qld: Griffith University.

Stavrou, M. P. (2003). Mixing with your mind. Mosman, NSW: Flux Research Pty Ltd.

Tarasti, E. (2002). Signs of music: A guide to musical semiotics. New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.

Tharp, T. (2006). The creative habit: Learn it and use it for life. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster Inc.

Thomas, C. (1990). Personal correspondence.

Thompson, P. & McIntyre, P. (2013). Rethinking creative practice in record production and studio recording education: Addressing the field. Journal on the Art of Record Production(8). [online]. Available at http://arpjournal.com/2603/rethinking-creative-practice-in-record-production- and-studio-recording-education-addressing-the-field/

Tingen, P. (2013). Flood & fire in the studio. Audio Technology, 94, 31-36.

Tingen, P. (2012). Most important link in the chain? Audio Technology, 90, 48-54.

Tingen, P. (2010). Inside track: Muse ‘The Resistance’, interview with Mark Stent. Sound on Sound, February 2010. [online]. Available at http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb10/articles/it_0210.htm

Tingen, P. (2007). Secrets of the mix engineers: Chris Lord-Alge. My chemical romance. Sound On Sound, May 2007. Available at http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may07/articles/cla.htm

Tolle, E. (2004). The power of now: A guide to spiritual enlightenment. Novato, CA: New World Library.

Tolle, E. (2005). A new earth: Awakening to your life’s purpose. Camperwell, Victoria: New Penguin.

References 54 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Toulson, R. (2008). Can we fix it? The consequences of ‘fixing it in the mix’ with common equalisation techniques are scientifically evaluated. Journal on the Art of Record Production (3). [online]. Available at http://robtoulson.rt60.co.uk/rt_docs/RT_EQEffects.pdf

Vintage King (2014). Chris Lord-Alge and Bob Clearmountain take over Apogee studios. [Weblog]. Available at: http://vintageking.com/blog/2014/06/deconstructed

Weston, D (2014). Personal correspondence.

Williams, A. (2011). Unpublished paper presented at the 2011 conference of the Society of Ethnomusicology, Philadelphia, PA.

Wolpert, R.S. (2000). Attention to key in a non-directed music listening task: Musicians vs. non-musicians. Music Perception, 18(2), 225-230.

Zak, A. J. (2001). The poetics of rock: Cutting tracks, making records. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

Zaeger, M. (2006). Music production: A manual for producers, composers, arrangers and students. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

Zagorski-Thomas, S (2007). The Musicology of Record Production. Twentieth- century music 4(2), 189-207

Zukav, G. (1990). The seat of the soul: an inspiring vision of humanity’s spiritual destiny. United Kingdom: Rider.

References 55 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Discography

Bon Iver. http://boniver.org

Deadmau5. (2010). 4x4 =12 (LP album). Ultra records: USA

Explosions in the sky. (2011) Let me back in (Single): USA

Feist. (2007), Sea lion Woman (Single) Digital download

Foo Fighters. (2011). Wasting Light. (LP album). RCA: USA

Ian Moss (1989). Matchbook. (LP album). Mushroom: Australia.

Ilan Bloomstone. (2014). Spheres (Single). Available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qf_fleQeAdE

INXS. (1987). Kick. (LP album). WEA: Australia.

Karnivool. (2009). Sound Awake. (LP Album). Cymatic Records: Australia

Katy Perry. (2010). Teenage Dream. (LP album). Capitol Records: USA

Lykke Li. (2010). Get Some. (Single). LL: Sweden

Metz. (2013). Wasted (Single) Lunch box records: USA

MGMT. (2008). Kids. (Single) Colombia records: USA

Nirvana. (2014). Available at http://www.nirvanamusic.com/

Sarah Blasko. (2014). Available at http://www.sarahblasko.com/

Seal. (1991). Seal. (LP album). Warner music: UK.

Tyrese. (2011). Fireworkz (Single). Voltron records: USA

Discography 56 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

CD Portfolio of Works

These CD tracks are provided to support the various findings as argued within this dissertation. All mix variations are included to demonstrate the suitability of the choices made during this research and I have included the original ‘artist rough mixes’ so that comparisons can be clearly made in regards to musical genre, technical systems and creative approaches as described. All tracks are technically ‘un-mastered’ in the sense that they may not yet be ‘commercial ready’. However, a tailoring process has been intentionally employed to produce the mix to a point where i) a mastering engineer may need to do as little as possible, and ii) the artists are provided with suitable indicative work. For example: mix buss compression has been applied where necessary to produce the relevant creative effect and stylistic character; for the purposes of consistency a limiter has been applied throughout.

The Phoncurves (2013). Lover. Written and produced by Abbie Roberts and Naomi Hodges.

Track 1: Artist rough mix, Lover. Track 2: OTB mix, Lover. Track 3: ITB mix, Lover.

Dave’s Pawn Shop (2013). Requiem. Written and produced by Jake Williamson and James Dimick.

Track 4: Artist rough mix, Requiem. Track 5: OTB mix, Requiem. Track 6: ITB mix, Requiem.

Maximo (2014). Family. Written and produced by Mitch Pattugalan.

Track 7: Artist rough mix, Family. Track 8: OTB mix, Family. Track 9: ITB mix, Family.

Ben Sinclair (2013). Elements. Written and produced by Ben Sinclair.

Track 10: Artist rough mix, Elements. Track 11: OTB mix, Elements. Track 12: ITB mix, Elements.

CD Portfolio of Works 57 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Aquilla Young (2014). Vagabond. Written by Anjanette Chua, produced by Anjanette Chua and Tom Dodd.

Track 13: Artist rough mix, Vagabond. Track 14: OTB mix, Vagabond.

Aquilla Young (2014). Tide. Written by Anjanette Chua, produced by Anjanette Chua and Tom Dodd.

Track 15: Artist rough mix, Tide. Track 16: ITB mix, Tide.

Creature Kind (2014). I’ll Make You Mine and Forever. Written by David Baker and Zachary Miller, produced by Zachary Miller and Brendan Anthony.

Track 17: OTB mix, I’ll Make You Mine. Track 18: ITB mix, Forever

CD Portfolio of Works 58 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendices

The following appendices are an integral resource to this project. They detail and present operational facts, practice and theories behind the methodologies outlined earlier. This material is also designed to compliment the dissertation to support the reader’s understanding of my practices whilst providing a general resource for mix system design, on-going. The appendices are arranged as follows:

• Appendix 1 outlines the mix philosophy, creative workflow, and technology including: the five pillars and Stairways process and their integral role in mix system design. Following is the studio equipment list used for this research. Finally the four dimensions of mixing are tabled for analysis purposes.

• Appendix 2 discusses production consistencies within rock and folk styles of music.

• Appendices 3-4 outline the mix system design and journal notes for both ITB and OTB mix systems used for the The Phoncurves mixes.

• Appendices 5-6 outline the mix system design and journal notes for both ITB and OTB mix systems used for the Dave’s Pawn Shop mixes. The journal writings present a log of the work practice, highlighting areas of positive and negative practical and creative application.

• Appendix 7 discusses production styles in electronic music and action research cycles for Chapter Three

• Appendix 8 outlines the Stairways process and gateway key for the artists Maximo and Ben Sinclair.

• Appendices 9-12 outline the mix system design and journal notes for both ITB and OTB mix systems used for the Maximo and Ben Sinclair mixes.

• Appendix 13 outlines action research cycles for Chapter Four.

• Appendix 14 outlines the Stairways process and gateway key for the artists Aquilla Young and Creature Kind mixes.

• Appendices 15-18 outline the mix system design and journal notes for both ITB and OTB mix systems used for the Aquilla Young and Creature Kind mixes.

Appendices 59 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 1: Philosophy, creative workflow, and the essential dimensions of the mix

1.1 ‘Five Pillars’ Mix Chains

The five pillars of a mix: mixing consistency

There are five important elements of a mix that deserve special consideration. I like to think of them as the ‘pillars’ that a mix ‘stands upon’. The professional mixer usually has a preference of equipment for the processing of these pillars; CLA comes to mind as an advocate to this process (Pensado’s Place, 2012). The five pillars are: the mix buss (mix stereo output), kick drum, snare drum, lead vocals and bass.

CLA had a lot to do with my training so there is no surprise I use some high quality pieces of outboard equipment on the pillars of every mix. This equipment may be used in both mix systems: OTB / ITB. In the analysis of this research this practice isolates difference in sound between mix systems to either creative practice or summing method, as the pillar process should support the mix identically in all applications. The five pillars are the foundation that holds a mix together and are an integral part to this dissertation’s mix analysis process. They are:

• Mix buss: Avedis E27 equalizers, Smart research C1 mix buss compressor.

• Kick drum: SSL 5000 series equalizer and compressor.

• Snare drum: SSL 5000 series equalizer and compressor.

• Lead Vocals: Neve 51 series channel strip, Urei LA4 (modded) compressor, Orban 356A de-esser

• Bass: Neve 51 series channel strip, Urei 5110 compressor.

1.2 The ‘Stairways’ methodology

To produce great mixes the mixer needs to design a mix system that is the vehicle to create within, and there are many different types of vehicles for various styles of music. To design a mix system the mixer will do some research and make a decision on one aspect of the mixing for the song and then consider other aspects and so on and so on. This process is like a set of stairs where we gather information along the way to design a mix system. Finally we get to the gates, use our key (mix system) and at some point creativity in the process takes over. Below is a Stairways chart I used that aids in the development of the mix system for the DPS and The Phoncurves mixes.

Appendix 1 60 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Stairway Dave’s Pawn Shop The Phoncurves

Who is the mix for? The artist Management, artist, potential record company airplay on JJJ.

Understand how mix Drums SRV-2000 reverb, trigger, Use NLS and as much old systems and equipment rock sound, and Usual 5 major pillar sounding plugins as possible, generate their sound. chains. Guitars as many analogue Fairchild, Pultec, Mono room Utilize

outs as possible. For clarity. stereo compressor pan middle for centre framing. Design. Slate VTM

Understand that the Lots of editing, session all over the Session organised really well very song and its production place. 8 vocals to choose from. This neat, produced well just needed to are essential. should all have been done in the be polished a few ideas to add in production process. The comping of the mix process. vocals gets in the way of the creative mix process

Use artists reference Metz, Nirvana Sarah Blasko, Feist

Listen to the rough mix Raw, drums lacking power guitars, Vocal production paramount. whole track not distorted enough

1.3 ‘Gateway’ Key

This is the mix system design stage: the key that unlocks the gateway to the creative process. The mix system will be designed around the Stairways and gateway key process and should allow the mixer to take the mix sonically and creatively wherever possible.

Key element Dave’s Pawn Shop The Phoncurves

Mental representation of how Distortion: Guitars and drums power. Spatiality, front to back, mix should sound The Bass sound is paramount to the contrasting b vocal levels and track it moves the track. Track needs fx, l voc focused. Trigger. For some depth though. Delays to add bigger drum sound

Limiting creative factors None : organized chaos Dynamics caused by tones Go your hardest and minimal automation. Limited use of fx and soundscapes. Realness is required.

Understand engineering skills Selection of distortion, and Vintage sounds and use of are a given. compression tools, trigger. similar plugs sounds and technology

Designing the mix system from ITB: Appendix 5 ITB: Appendix 3 stairways

Designing the mix system from OTB: Appendix 6 OTB: Appendix 4 stairways

Appendix 1 61 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

1.4 Studio hardware: The OTB mix system

My home facility utilizes a Yamaha m1532: 32-channel analogue console with inserts on every channel and automation via Mackie ultra mix (VCA)4 system. At this point it is necessary to understand the importance of the inserts and automation system on the analogue console. This allows the inserting of appropriate outboard processing equipment on every output on the desk and the automation system is post insert. This enables final fader and mute automation to be adjusted post-outboard equipment used on tracks. This console also uses 4 effects sends two stereo effects returns, four sub group masters and a monitoring matrix system. This allows me to run the console utilising two subgroups and combining them in the matrix as the mix output. The sound card I use is the Profire 2626: 26 outputs: 8 analogue, 16 ADAT and 2 SPDIF.

 Yamaha M1532 32 channel analogue console (1982)  SSL 5000 series producer pack (two pre amps, two mono EQs, two stereo EQs, two mono compressors)  Neve 51 series producer stereo channel pre, EQ and compressor  2 Avedis E27 EQs  1 stereo Smart Research C1 mix buss compressor  1 Urei LA4 compressor (modded JLM)  1 DBX 117 stereo limiter  1 DBX 160A compressor  JLM LA500 compressor  1 Orban 356A de-esser  1 JBL/Urei 7110 compressor  1 Symetrix 501 compressor  2 Symetrix stereo 525 compressors  1 stereo DBX 166 compressor limiter gates (1984)  2 Valley People Dynamite compressors  DOD R-866 stereo compressor  Stereo SSL clone compressor  JBL M6444 quad gates  Rane GE30 graphic EQ  Watkins Copycat tape delay  Roland SRV-2000 reverb  Roland SRV-330 reverb

4 VCA: Voltage controlled amplifier

Appendix 1 62 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

 Yamaha SPX-90 mark II  Yamaha Rev500 reverb  Digitech Vocalist 2  Mackie 32 track Ultramix automation system  Monitoring Yamaha HS8s  Monitor section: Passive SM Pro M-patch 2  Assortment of guitar effects pedals for sound sculpture: Boss: Blues Driver, Ibanez Tube Screamer, Russian Big Muff, DynaComp Distortion, Danelectro Daddy’o Distortion, Danelectro Cool Cat Chorus, Danelectro Tuna melt Tremolo, Morely wah and Volume, Line 6 Echo Park delay, Boss Oc-2 Octave pedal, Boss chorus, Tech 21 XXL bass distortion.

Studio software: The ITB mix system

Of particular interest to this study is the effect that the summing process (digital/analogue) has on the sonic attributes of the mix. It should be understood that depending on hardware output numbers any ITB mix setup can use external outboard processing on essential elements of the mix. This is a current industry practice and will be the practice for this research.

Pro Tools 10, Profire 2626, 8 I/O patchable inserts for outboard gear. Normally used for: kick, snare, lead vocals, bass, and master buss with two spare depending on mix needs. I will also use the Waves NLS (Non- Linear Summer) plugin. This will be used on every instrument subgroup and the master output. The NLS plugin is a plugin that emulates the sound of an analogue desk. There are many options with this type of plugin. Waves NLS is one of the more affordable and popular avenues for this type of processing in the Industry.

 Waves: Mercury Plugin Bundle  Waves API, SSL, Puig Eqp1a, Flux Epure mastering EQ  CLA Classic compressors pack  TL Space  Melodyne  Slate virtual tape machine (VTM) plugin

In Chapter Three as part of the action research framework, I added the complete UAD plugin collection. This added great versatility to both mix systems.

Appendix 1 63 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

1.5 The four dimensions of mixing

For the mixing engineer listening is the road map to success and there are many facets to it, Mixerman (2010, p. 65) discusses the four dimensions of mixing: left to right; front to back; frequency – up to down; dynamics over time. These four dimensions are boundaries to listen within while analysing a mix: a form of critical listening.

Appendix 1 64 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 2: Productions styles of AC music and their influence on system design

The music styles of the mix session in Chapter Two are alternate heavy rock and alternate folk, so I will discuss some production constants the mixer can use as inspiration to develop a mix imagery prior to system design.

Rock music mix imagery and system design

Rock music including metal and progressive styles use strong defined kick drum sounds to set the feel of the track especially when double kick patterns are used. The snare can vary depending on band preferences but is usually of a strong personality, set in its own space to define the overall rhythmical pattern. Bass lines often follow kick patterns in this style of music, therefore side chain compression can be utilized to strengthen the kick/bass relationship and tighten the bottom end.

Folk music mix imagery and system design

Folk based style rhythm sections can be a direct contrast to the above: kick drums often lack definition, and drum tracks are often double tracked and panned hard left and right (Bon Iver is a good example of this). The use of vintage type delays and reverbs over certain folk genres provides a subtler yet deeper sense of space and dimension compared to traditional modern reverb techniques as this enhances the resurgence of lo fi / vintage styled sounding mixes. Vocal production of contemporary folk is very diverse; it can have various layers of lead vocals, ghosting parts and harmonies providing opportunities to provide equalization variances between parts and a contrast between dimensional perspective in mixes with lead vocals mixed completely dry yet double to quadrupled tracked and backing vocals delayed with tape delays and spring reverbs but panned in mono.

The relevance of understanding the artist’s vision and production aspects of an associated music style is the platform from which to draw inspiration and develop a mix system to create further. My professional experience delivered this knowledge and the Stairways method fine-tunes it for every individual song I mix. Obviously, how the production of AC styled music effects the mix system design could be discussed endlessly, however, I trust this is a good example of scratching the surface of what a mixer can begin to ponder when creating Sacks’ imagery of musical / sonic creation (p. 4 of this dissertation).

Appendix 2 65 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 3: OTB mix for Lover (CD portfolio, track 2)

Analogue console routing

Note: the mono room microphone used as a snare replacement channel 2.

Channel Number Track Name Outboard equipment

1. Kick SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

2. Mono room SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

3. Over heads left

4. Over heads right

5. Hi hat

6. Floor tom DBX166 compressor (1980’s)

7. Lead vocal Neve 51, Orban 356a, Urei LA4

8. Bass Neve 51, JBL 7110 compressor

9. Drum rooms left SSL stereo buss compressor Clone, SSL 5000 EQ

10. Drum rooms right SSL stereo buss compressor Clone, SSL 5000 EQ

11. Electric guitar Symetrix 501 compressor

12. BA Backing vocal

13. Verse Backing vocals left

14. Verse Backing vocals right

15. Piano left SSL 5000 EQ

16. Piano right SSL 5000 EQ

17. Reverse tape delay left

18. Reverse Tape delay right

19. Chorus harmonies left

20. Chorus harmonies right

21. Additional backing vocals left

22. Additional backing vocals right

23. Effects left

24. Effects right

27. Desk effects Roland SRV 330 L

28. Desk effects Roland SRV 330 R

29. Desk effects Yamaha Rev 500 L

30. Desk effects Yamaha Rev 500 R

Sub Master 1 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

Appendix 3 66 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Sub Master 2 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

Effects return 1 Desk effects Roland SRV-2000 L

Effects return 2 Desk effects Roland SRV2000R

Effects return 3 Desk effects Yamaha SPX-90 L

Effects return 4 Desk effects Yamaha SPX-90 R

Journal entry summary mixed OTB December 12, 2013

I found that many creative ideas flowed from the ‘Stairways’ concept: a) The kick drum was too tight and clicky, it required three samples to achieve a full enough sound. I knew through the ‘Stairway process’ that I wanted to use the ‘Slate Virtual Tape Simulator’ on the kick, mono room and ambient tracks. This brought some vintage tone and warmth to the drum sound. I also used the Puig Eqp1a plugin and a large boost of 100hz on the desk to all drum sounds, I felt this provided the depth and bottom end needed to give the track some platform to lay on. b) The bass wouldn’t sit with drums, so I decided to use the slate tape simulator again. Often I find balance is all about equalization and not level. With the Puig Eqp1a and 100hz +3db added on desk again the bass sat well. c) One of my overriding problems with the rough mix was that the piano sounded too normal and this was unlike the references; therefore, during the mix process I decided to distort it. I don’t know where this idea came form, but it contrasts well with the sweetness of the vocals. d) As mentioned in the ‘Stairways notes’ the bridge needed something special; whilst in the mixing process I listened to the lyrics (Something I don’t do till actually mixing the vocals into the track) I then decided I wanted to symbolize the lyrics in the middle section focussing on the words ‘kissed me in the rain’. I tried some stereo reverse tape delay on the piano, this added width, depth and feel and inturn softened the whole piano part that was originally dry and just sticking out. e) I felt the mix was sitting well and wanted to be a little creative with the production so I put a gated reverb on the backing vocal verse shouts, to make them standout but not sound to wet. I used a triplet delay on the second shout out but I wanted this to be quite subliminal and add depth perception. f) Going into the mix I knew I wanted to create contrasts between old sounds and modern, crusty and clean, wet and dry and stereo and mono. Whilst equalizing and compressing and using reverbs it was this creative thought process that lead me to try a few varying ideas on the lead vocal. One of these was deciding upon an old spring sounding reverb for the lead vocal; during this creative initiative I decided to make the reverb mono, as

Appendix 3 67 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

this contrasted nicely with the stereo dry backing vocals. This was not a preconceived idea but came to me in the flow of mixing the track. g) When I tried to balance the Lead vocal on top of the bed it just felt too sweet. Therefore, I added an auxiliary channel that was inserted with a distortion plugin ‘guitar stomp’ set to overdrive and mixed this and the clean original vocal sound until I found the right texture. I felt this brought the vocals forward and presented a great contrast to the whole ambient drum sound. This was not preconceived the idea came during the mix process. h) Finally I automated the master fader: up where the drums enter and down .5 of a dB in the bridge then back up 1db into the last chorus. Master fader automation is paramount to delivering dynamics to the track and this aids in the transference of emotion as various sections go up and down in volume / intensity. These are minimal increments they are very feel orientated. I feel most comfortable doing them with a fader (not a mouse). i) The use of the DAW interface integrated extremely well for when automation was needed in the pro tools session it was easy to do this with the faders on the controller and I believe integral to the OTB mix system. j) By the end I felt the track balanced easily utilising the desk to equalize tracks (and a few plugins were used). I finished the mix quickly; it felt creative and sounded great to me. I often find I get to the end of a mix and have no idea how I got there or in what order I did things, however, as long as I don’t feel I am chasing my tail or going around in circles, I feel it is a creative process.

Appendix 3 68 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 4: ITB Mix for Lover (CD portfolio, track 3)

ITB insert / outboard equipment patching

ITB mixing can incorporate outboard equipment patching and this is a common practice in the industry, this research is focusing on comparison of digital and analogue summing and creative practice of mixes. Hence this outboard patching was used to simulate what is convention in the industry.

Pro tools output/insert Track name Outboard equipment

1. Drum Room left SSL stereo buss compressor Clone, SSL 5000 EQ

2. Drum Room right SSL stereo buss compressor Clone, SSL 5000 EQ

3. Kick SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

4. Mono room SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

5. Lead vocal Neve 51, Orban 356a, Urei LA4

6. Bass Neve 51, JBL 7110 compressor

7. Master mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

8. Master mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

ITB software plugin routing

Lover ITB flow chart

Track Name Aux master Outboard

Kick Yes

Mono room Yes

Over heads left

Over heads right Drum master with NLS Hi hat Master aux: Floor tom outboard insert Drum rooms left Yes and NLS Drum rooms right Yes

Bass Di Bass Master with NLS Bass rig Yes

Piano left Piano Master with NLS Piano right

Electric guitar Electric guit master with

Appendix 4 69 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

NLS

Verse Backing Verse b vox master with vocals 8 tracks NLS stereo

BA BA Backing vocal 8 tracks BA BV master with NLS stereo

Chorus harmonies Ch Harmonies master with 12 tracks stereo NLS

Shout vocals 8 Shout master with NLS tracks stereo

Additional backing vocals 8 tracks Additional b vox with NLS stereo

Lead Vocal master with Lead vocal Yes NLS

Reverse tape delay left Tape delay master with Reverse Tape NLS delay right

Long reverb stereo

Short delay mono

Ping pong delay FX Master with NLS stereo

Plate stereo

Spring reverb

ITB Journal entry summary, Lover mixed ITB December 14, 2013

This mix was done the day after the OTB mix so a lot of the creative ideas were still in my head. a) Straight away I realised I needed more computer power, with the amount of auxiliary masters and plugins I was utilising in the process eventually, I bounced some tracks out to minimize computer processor load. I believe to mix ITB permanently I would need the most powerful of computers currently available. (However this is very affordable these days) b) I must admit, as this was a new way to mix for me the creative practice felt weird and awkward, I was a little confused at the complex setup I had created, however I gradually got used to it. (See a block diagram of the ITB Pro Tools setup I designed above)

Appendix 4 70 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven c) One of the biggest creative roadblocks I encountered was having to equalize the majority of tracks ITB, this used plug in’s as I normally do that with the analogue desk equalizer. This is a mouse-controlled application and is incredibly uncreative to me. When utilising the desk I can often equalize two tracks at once to see how they feel together using my hands turning knobs is a definitively more creative process for me. This process was a constant weakness in maintaining a creative focus. d) I felt through the whole mix that my understanding of the complete system is letting the process down. I was not addressing a key ‘Stairways’ issue. My knowledge of the system was not of a high enough standard so that I did not have to think logically to do things. It was a constantly interrupted performance. (This is something that can be learned and practiced though) e) Towards the end of the mix it felt like the foundations of the song (drums and bass) were not sitting. I did start changing drum sounds, changing the e.q on the bass and kick to help the mix sit better. I believe I have sorted the problem out but this does not usually happen when using a system I know well. f) Master fader rides were made very easy with controller and they felt very creative and I feel worked well. g) The process of utilising an external mix buss equalizer and compressor felt exactly the same as it does when mixing OTB. I felt it glued the track well and the track was balanced with few additional issues. h) Because I had mixed this track the day before I had memories of settings used, I did try to remain creative but similar techniques eventuated. i) Throughout the mix I started to feel lazy, as I needed to stop the mix process to add equalizers to some master auxiliary channels. Therefore, I did not use my ‘gateway key’ process suitably, as all master auxiliaries require equalizer plugins on them as a setup procedure. j) I was not trying to make it sound like the OTB mix, I was trying to make it sound how I felt it needed. The mix felt like it was clear and because my understanding of the system was growing (which did not take long) I felt the mix came together rather easily. At the time I liked how it sounded. However I was not sure of the bottom end.

Appendix 4 71 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 5: OTB Mix for Requiem (CD portfolio, track 5)

Analogue console routing

Channel Number Track Name Outboard equipment

1. Kick SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

2. Snare SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

3. Over heads left

4. Over heads right

5. Rack tom DBX166 compressor (1980’s)

6. Floor tom DBX166 compressor (1980’s)

7. Lead vocal Neve 51, Orban 356a, Urei LA4

8. Bass Neve 51, JBL 7110 compressor

9. Drum rooms left SSL stereo buss compressor Clone, SSL 5000 eq

10. Drum rooms right SSL stereo buss compressor Clone, SSL 5000 eq

11. Electric Guitar 1 left

12. Electric Guitar 1 right

13. Electric Guitar 2 left

14. Electric Guitar 2 right

15. Electric Guitar 3 delay left SSL 5000 EQ

16. Electric Guitar 3 delay right SSL 5000 EQ

17. Electric Guitar 4 left

18. Electric Guitar 4 right

19. Keys left Symetrix 525 compressor

left

20. Keys right Symetrix 525 compressor right

21. Guitar 5 melody Symetrix 501 compressor

23. Backing Vocals left

24. Backing Vocals right

25. Effects, Reverbs, Reverbs, Reverse vocals left

26. Effects, Reverbs, Reverbs, Reverse vocals right

Appendix 5 72 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

27. Parallel Compression Kick Valley People dynamite compressor

28. Parallel Compression Snare Valley People dynamite compressor

29. Desk effects Yamaha Rev 500 L

30. Desk effects Yamaha Rev 500 R

Sub Master 1 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

Sub Master 2 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

Effects return 1 Desk effects Roland SRV-2000 L

Effects return 2 Desk effects Roland SRV-2000R

Effects return 3 Desk effects Yamaha SPX-90 L

Effects return 4 Desk effects Yamaha SPX-90 R Journal entry summary, Requiem mixed OTB in June 2013 a) I followed a very well known procedure for this mix, I knew I had to lay a foundation for the mix and that was the drums and bass. The bands influences needed powerful drums. With the use of the trigger plugin (Kick and snare) and my old Roland SRV 2000 reverb (snare and toms) and SSL clone compressor (ambient microphones), I really got this going fast. I decided to add some parallel compression on the kick and snare only in this mix. While I was pulling the drum sound. I can do this process on the console utilising two spare channels (27 and 28) and my vintage Valley People dynamite limiters. These when mixed in to the kick and snare tracks I found really added to the snap of the drum sound. b) I found with the bass even with the high quality Neve chain I use, it was actually the Yamaha desk driving of the pre amp and equalizer that gave the bass the midrange definition it needed to sit on top of this foundation. c) Once I had the bass and drums pumping, the guitars were next to work on. The SSL 5000 equalizer worked a treat and I found the power of the track was being represented well by the width and presence of the heavy guitars in the chorus. I must say: This was the first track I mixed for this research and the creative journal has minimal notes as this mix came together so well and I was so in the zone I had very little to say other than. ‘I think the mix rocks!’ In all seriousness though, I did feel the second break before the second verse needed some kind of add in: so I developed the reverse reverb into that section. I did rides on all things necessary. Kick, snare, bass, master fader and all guitars were all done via the Mackie automation post-outboard gear and with a fader and hand. I feel the dynamic flow of the guitar automation is a key to the creativity of this mix.

Appendix 5 73 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

From delay to melody to raw distortion, I love the guitar production on this track and how it is presented in this mix. d) Also there is much drum automation done on this track and the presence of the kick drum is so important in maintaining the clarity of the beat of the tune and the power in the outro section. I added some simple delays to the backing vocal screams and that added some depth perception to the mix. e) This mix took me four hours, and it was a big session. Sometimes when something works it works. I think this is one of those special times everything went right. This mix to me has everything depth, spatiality, clarity and most important it is emotive and represents the song well.

Appendix 5 74 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 6: ITB Mix for Requiem (CD portfolio, track 6)

ITB insert / outboard equipment patching

Pro tools output/insert Track name Outboard equipment

1. Srv 2000 drum reverb Roland SRV-2000

2. Srv 2000 drum reverb Roland SRv-2000

3. Kick SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

4. Snare SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

5. Lead vocal Neve 51, Orban 356a, Urei LA4

6. Bass Neve 51, JBL 7110 compressor

7. Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

8. Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

ITB software plugin routing

Requiem ITB flow chart

Track Name Auxiliary master Aux master Outboard

Kick in Yes Kick master Kick out Yes sn top Snare Master sn bottom

Hi hat

Oh L Oh Master Drum Master with NLS Oh R Master aux: insert and

Tom 1 NLS Tom Master Tom 2

Close room stereo

Bright room stereo Room Master

Hallway mic

Bass di Bass Master with bass mic 1 Yes NLS bass mic 2

Appendix 6 75

Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven bass mic 3

Gtr 1: 6 tracks Gtr 1 Master stereo

Gtr 2: 6 tracks Gtr 2 Master stereo

Delay guitar 8 Gtr Master with Delay gtr Master tracks stereo NLS

Gtr 4: 2 tracks Gtr 4 Master stereo

Gtr 5 di Gtr 5 Master Gtr 5 amp

Ambient keys stereo Keys Master with

Fat synth stereo NLS

Lead Vocal Master L vocals Yes with NLS

Bv's 10 tracks B vox Master with stereo NLS

Long reverb stereo

Short delay mono

Ping pong delay stereo

Plate stereo Fx Master with NLS

Spring reverb

Non Lin reverb

Srv 2000 reverb Yes

Long delay mono

Journal entry summary, Requiem mixed ITB 16 December 2013 a) When designing the mix system (due to limited outboard insert numbers), I had to make a decision between utilising my standard SSL clone compressor on the ambient drum room microphones, the valley people limiters I used on the parallel compression on the kick and snare or my Roland SRV 2000 reverb, which I always use for rock drums (snare and toms). I chose the Reverb. As a result I feel I did struggle with the drum sound for some reason. I was utilising the same samples on kick and snare that I did on the OTB mix and the same outboard gear; I attempted parallel compression utilising

Appendix 6 76

Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

various plugin compressors (I ended up using the SSL channel) however, I could not get the kick and snare sounding as punchy as I wanted, and it was a similar process for the drum ambient tracks. I tried utilising varying plugins and ended up settling for the Waves G-SSL compressor. However, it is interesting that I am so used to how my usual outboard compressors work with drum tracks that I could not find a suitable replacement ITB. I proceeded to get the drums sounding good. But feel this is one area of this mix I am not happy with (the overall drum sound.) I believe my choice of plugin for parallel compression was a major factor here. b) The mix system was more familiar and having the equalizers on the auxiliary masters worked well. The process of equalizing with a mouse is yet again painfully uncreative. However, I feel that by understanding the system the mix itself was falling together well. c) During this mix I actually found having to stop and write my thoughts down was annoying as well and breaking the performance of the mix. I understand this may seem a bit temperamental, but as mentioned I am a very creative based person, I don’t like to be interrupted when I am in the middle of something that I feel is a creative practice. So the journal itself began to be annoying; does this change the mix , I don’t think so, I just felt it was important to understand how creative a process I believe mixing is. d) I remember the OTB mix required many dynamic fader rides, this mix did as well, utilising the controller for this purpose and doing these rides inside the box felt just as creative as doing it with my OTB automation system. These included the master fader ride and this I feel worked well. e) I had not listened to the OTB mix for at least one month prior to doing this mix. I had enormous problems getting the guitars to sit where I needed them I did try equalizing, balancing, automation everything I normally do. However it seems to me that there is definitive reasoning for analysis into the sonic footprint and in particular the clarity of this mix with the regards to electric guitars in the mix. There are a lot of tracks of guitars and to me I have not achieved as much attitude (clarity) as I would like in the heavy electric guitar sound. f) I cannot explain why I felt I did not achieve the best results for the drums or the electric guitars, there are two possibilities: 1. I had a bad day 2. The mix system or setup I utilized was not capable of achieving the sound I was trying to generate (or was used to generating) I think it is important to understand I have been utilising the same mix system for thirteen years and the honest mixer knows not every mix is going to be perfect. The Stairways process illuminates the many variables involved in creating a great mix. However, without any arrogance intended usually I achieve a mix I am

Appendix 6 77

Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

supremely happy with (they are not all ‘great mixes’)but at the vey least a great representation of the recording. It must be said by the end of this mix I felt it was ok, I was not that impressed by it, however, I do look forward to analysing it with the OTB mix.

Appendix 6 78

Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 7: Electronic production styles and their influence on my mix practice

Katy Perry’s producer Dr Luke programs beats with audio samples then programs most of the sound ITB except for the use of some hardware analogue synths (Roland Juno 106) and then records the vocals ASCAP (2011). Dr Luke mixes during the production process but then employs a mix engineer to finalise the work. Serban Ghenea mixes the majority of Dr Lukes productions. A search on the Internet reveals evidence that Serban Ghenea mixes completely ITB (Gearslutz, 2010).

Kanye West. In contrast to Katy Perry, Kanye West uses multitudes of people as players and producers and they come from varying genre backgrounds. The music is then subjected to a final mix stage utilising Manny Marroquin (Tingen 2007b). Marroquin uses an SSL K series desk and a hybrid mix system.

Deadmau5 programs in Ableton and Cubase, but records many parts externally using outboard equipment. This is in direct contrast to many bedroom producers who simply program with soft synths, but what is of particular interest is that in this more electro type style Deadmau5 mixes during the composition process, and there is no real separate mix stage. This practice is quite common in electro circles and it is freely viewable as Deadmau5 has his own live stream where you can see him work. Deadmau5 (2013b), (2014).

These three styles are indicative of the variety of professional mixing practices within the scope of EL styled music. However, regardless of style, EL music sounds different to AC music and has a completely different sonic footprint requirement. Some may find it odd to group Kanye West and Deadmau5 within the same category and my reasoning must be made clear here. While there are significant stylistic variations and intended contexts for these styles (radio vs. club) there are still enough consistencies to allow them to be approached in the same way (Weston, 2014). The practices of Ghenea, Maroquin and Deadmau5 all provide evidence that the mixer needs a system they feel comfortable with to create. The Stairways process for the mixes in Chapter Three must facilitate a comfortable mix environment and this will be unpacked by the creative journal.

Action research cycles for Chapter Three

Following the findings in Chapter Two, I adapted my mixing process to facilitate some action research frameworks. These changes included:

1) I mixed ITB first to see if any varying inspiration comes to me whilst mixing OTB. In the first mixing session the second mix lacked any considerable originality from the first other than a different balance and sonic footprint.

Appendix 7 79

Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

2) I have been working ITB a lot more in my professional practice to increase my ability in this process. The findings from the first mixing session showed my understanding of the ITB setup was lacking and this is an essential step in the Stairways process (Gateway key: understanding your engineering ability is a given).

Appendix 7 80

Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 8: Stairway and gateway key for EL mixes

Stairway Maximo Ben Sinclair

Who is the mix for? The artist The artist

Understand how mix Processing of bottom end, Slate Solidity in bottom end, with systems and equipment VTM and NLS, Distortion as a punchy bottom end. generate their sound. passive enhancer, sans amp and Enhancement of midrange of

amp simulators, Pultec type bass. Brightness still so EQs,.OTB mix drive desk hard. important mix buss EQ in NLS summer drive added. particular as there is no vocals.

Understand engineering Selection of distortion (Decapitator), Balance is the key here and skills are a given. ITB mixing skill level raised. getting the kick drum at the right

level. Side chain compression imperative, this not a technique I have used in Electro styles much. Lacking experience in this area.

Understand that the song Track produced very well, no Track produced really well, track and its production are editing session ready to mix. ready to mix. essential.

Use artists reference Fireworkz by Tyrese Spheres by Ian Bluestone.

Listen to the rough mix Quite good. A good reference for Wonderful. The only thing I balance but the mix lacks some wanted to hear was a smoother character. top end.

‘Gateway’ Key

Key element Maximo Ben Sinclair

Mental representation of how Central image huge focal point and The kick beat drives the track, mix should sound backing vocals and synths are smooth top end. Kick should panned hard left and right, roughen drive the track the offbeat should up rhythm section where ever be accentuated by side chain possible. compression.

Limiting creative factors None : Do not distort too much and Parallel compression so lose vision of artist. important to the feel of this tune. Little experience in this area.

Designing the mix system ITB: Appendix 9 ITB: Appendix 11 from stairways

Designing the mix system OTB: Appendix 10 OTB: Appendix 12 from stairways

Appendix 9 81 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 9: ITB Mix for Family (CD portfolio, track 9)

ITB insert / outboard equipment patching

Pro tools output/insert Track name Outboard equipment

1. Kick SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

2. Snare SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

3. Lead vocal Neve 51, Orban 356a, Urei LA4

4. Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

5. Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

ITB software plugin routing

Family ITB flow chart

Track Name: Outboard Pro Tools Auxiliary master Auxiliary master inserts

kick Yes kick master Bassy Kick

kick 3 Yes snare master drums right

snare 1

808 sn Drum Master with NLS

distorted tom

hi hats Drum Master Master aux:insert and NLS clap

drum loop

finger snap

Sine Synth Stereo

Strings Stereo

Synth Line Keys Master with NLS stereo

Percussive synth Stereo

Appendix 9 82 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

French Horn

Arcade syth stereo

Piano Stereo Piano Piano riffs Master with NLS

Vox master Yes

Vox rap Vox master

24 tracks B B Vocal master with vocals NLS

Long reverb stereo

Short delay mono

Ping png delay stereo Fx Master with

Plate stereo NLS

Spring reverb

Non Lin reverb

Long delay

mono

ITB Journal entry summary, Family mixed ITB May 15th, 2014

I found I had a clear vision of what I wanted to create and the Stairways process delivered me the mixing system to do so. a) I had learnt from the previous chapters mixing session that I needed to spend suitable time setting up the gain structure inside pro tools. It is imperative that signal runs through plugins at appropriate level so that plug ins react in a way that the use is accustomed to. Using the waves NLS strip and stereo buss on most auxiliary masters this was a crucial procedure. As I wanted to drive the plug ins a little to achieve the desired sonic result. This was not difficult, it required using a mouse (again) which I find laborious but in the end it was a simple process. b) I found the SSL 5000 outboard equalizer combined with my Puig: Pultec styled plug in work very well on the kick sound for the bottom end vision I had.

Appendix 9 83 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven c) The snare needed to be snappy so combining the CLA 1176 plugin and the SSL 5000 outboard equalizer again worked really well. d) During the beginning of this mix process I came up with the idea of really making a feature of the loop section at 50 seconds and 2minutes and 5 sec. I distorted, gated and equalized it accordingly to add movement to the track and to add yet another edgy tone to the track. e) The lead vocal chain used my 51 series neve channel strip, I ran this quite hot hoping to push the neve just to the point of distortion and then wound it back a little. This is a technique mixers use to add a little bit of character to a sound. f) There were no master fader rides the recording was engineered very well. g) During the mixing process I also decided to use some side chain compression on the keyboard parts (triggered off the kick drum) This worked well and I feel helped the track move along a little better than the artists mix. h) I used the Pultec equalizer and the Slate VTM tape simulator plugin across the whole mix, this really adds some nice Hip Hop appropriate bottom end. i) The mix was completed in 3hours and 43 minutes and was very easy. Apart from using the mouse to change plug in settings I found this to be a very creative process of mixing. j) Additional creative ideas, delay and reverb on backing vocals, keyboards and sound FX. k) I only needed five external outboard outputs on this mix, the rest was completed ITB.

Appendix 9 84 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 10: OTB Mix for Family (CD portfolio, track 8)

Analogue console routing

Channel Number Track Name Outboard equipment

1. Kick SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

2. Snare SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

3. Drums

4. Loop Drive input stage of desk

5. Lead vocal Neve 51, Orban 356a, Urei LA4

6. Keys Left

7. Keys Right

8. Piano Left

9. Piano Right

10. Synth Line

11. Backing vocals left

12. Backing vocals right

13. Verse Backing vocals left

14. Verse Backing vocals right

23. Effects left All ITB

24. Effects right All ITB

Sub Master 1 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1, Puig Pultec and Slate VTM.

Sub Master 2 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1, Puig Pultec and Slate VTM.

Journal entry summary, Family mixed OTB May 16th, 2014. a) The track only took 40 minutes to balance and equalize, I found again I lacked inspiration to change anything but good mixing is about knowing when to change something. I found it even easier to balance on my desk than on the controller in the ITB mix. b) I decided to give the distorted loop sound its own output and rive the desk channel a bit as well.

Appendix 10 85 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven c) This mix came together so easy and I felt I had outdone the ITB mix without referencing it whilst in the mix session. Upon reflection I feel I had minimally done this. d) The mix took no time at all and was a complete creative success. e) I believe the work I had done ITB had setup and completed the creative image I had in my head, all I had to do was replicate that picture and that came very easy. f) All reverbs and delays on this mix were generated ITB.

Appendix 10 86 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 11: ITB Mix for Elements (CD portfolio, track 12)

ITB insert / outboard equipment patching

Pro tools output/insert Track name Outboard equipment

1. Kick SSL 5000 eq and compressor

2. Snare SSL 5000 eq and compressor

3. Bass Neve 51, JBL 7110

4. Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

5. Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

ITB software plugin routing

Elements ITB flow chart

Track Name: Auxillary Outboard Auxillary master Pro Tools master inserts

kick Yes

snare Yes Drum Master with NLS drums left

drums right

Bass Bass Master with NLS Yes

Arp 1stereo

Arp 2 stereo Master aux:insert and NLS Arp 3 stereo

Noise ambience Stereo Keys Master with NLS Pad

Piano

Synth 1 stereo

Synth 2 stereo

Noise stereo

ITB Journal entry summary, Elements mixed ITB May 15th, 2014

Appendix 11 87 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

I found I had a clear vision of what I wanted to create and the Stairways process delivered me the mixing system to do so. a) I had learnt from the previous chapters mixing session that I needed to spend suitable time setting up the gain structure inside pro tools. It is imperative that signal runs through plugins at appropriate level so that plug ins react in a way that the use is accustomed to. Using the Waves NLS strip and stereo buss on most auxiliary masters this was a crucial procedure. As I wanted to drive the plugins a little to achieve the desired sonic result. This was not difficult, it required using a mouse (again), which I find laborious but in the end it was a simple process. b) I found the SSL 5000 outboard equalizer combined with my Puig: pultec styled plug in work very well on the kick sound for the bottom end vision I had. c) The snare needed to be snappy so combining the CLA 1176 plugin and the SSL 5000 outboard equalizer again worked really well. d) During the beginning of this mix process I came up with the idea of really making a feature of the loop section at 50 seconds and 2minutes and 5 sec. I distorted, gated and equalized it accordingly to add movement to the track and to add yet another edgy tone to the track. e) The lead vocal chain used my 51 series neve channel strip, I ran this quite hot hoping to push the neve just to the point of distortion and then wound it back a little. This is a technique mixers use to add a little bit of character to a sound. f) There were no master fader rides the recording was engineered very well. g) During the mixing process I also decided to use some side chain compression on the keyboard parts (triggered off the kick drum) This worked well and I feel helped the track move along a little better than the artists mix. h) I used the pultec equalizer and the Slate VTM tape simulator plugin across the whole mix, this really adds some nice Hip Hop appropriate bottom end. i) The mix was completed in 3hours and 43 minutes and was very easy. Apart from using the mouse to change plug in settings I found this to be a very creative process of mixing. j) Additional creative ideas, delay and reverb on backing vocals, keyboards and sound fx. k) I only needed five external outboard outputs on this mix, the rest was completed ITB.

Appendix 11 88 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 12: OTB Mix for Elements (CD portfolio, track 11)

Analogue console routing

Channel Track Name Outboard equipment Number

1. Kick SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

2. Snare SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

3. Drums left

4. Drums right Drive input stage of desk

5. Bass Neve 51, Orban 356a, Urei LA4

6. Arp keys 1 left

7. Arp keys 1 right

8. Arp keys 2 left Arp keys 2 right

9. Arp Keys 3 left

10. Arp keys 3 right

11. Noise and Ambience left

12. Noise and Ambience right

13. Pad Left

14. Pad Right

15. Piano Left

16. Piano Right

17. Synth 1 Left Synth 1 Right

18. Synth 2 Left

19. Synth 2 right

20. White Noise Left

21. White Noise Right

23. Effects left All ITB

24. Effects right All ITB

Sub Master 1 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1, Puig Pultec and Slate VTM

Sub Master 2 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1, Puig Pultec and Slate VTM

Appendix 12 89 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Journal entry summary, Elements mixed OTB May 16th, 2014 a) The track only took 40 minutes to balance and equalize, I found again I lacked inspiration to change anything but good mixing is about knowing when to change something. I found it even easier to balance on my desk than on the controller in the ITB mix. b) I decided to give the distorted loop sound its own output and rive the desk channel a bit as well. c) This mix came together so easy and I felt I had outdone the ITB mix without referencing it whilst in the mix session. Upon reflection I feel I had minimally done this. d) The mix took no time at all and was a complete creative success. e) I believe the work I had done ITB had setup and completed the creative image I had in my head, all I had to do was replicate that picture and that came very easy. f) All reverbs and delays on this mix were generated ITB.

Appendix 12 90 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 13: Action research cycles for Chapter Four

Following the findings in Chapter Three, I have adapted my mixing process to facilitate some action research frameworks.

Acquisition of UAD plugins: I have acquired the complete set of UAD plugins; these soft processors are renowned to be amongst the best plugins available on the market and contextualise my research within the professional industry. They broaden the palate of both ITB and OTB mix systems, enabling greater flexibility and versatility. I have practiced and become very familiar with the majority of these plugins.

Individualised mix design: as discussed in Chapter Three, I believe there are grounds for further research into an individualised mix design concept as an adaptation to the Stairways process. This design concept works hand in hand with the Stairways process and is outlined in the Figure below.

Figure 4: Individualised mix design.

This diagram outlines an approach to individual mix system design for all mixers, it works in unison with the Stairways process but adds refinements including: the mixer’s imagery of what is best for the song, the experience the mixer has with this style of music and the technology used within this style, the creative preferences of the mixer (how they like things setup) and the appropriate use of technology that will generate the mixer’s vision. This new approach focuses on the mixer’s vision and fine-tunes the mix system to suit their experience.

To facilitate this I will only use software plugins that I have great experience in and feel most creative with, and I will simplify my ITB mix setup to facilitate a more creative experience. To ensure this I will design the ITB mix session so it has been bounced down to

Appendix 13 91 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven a maximum of 48 tracks, this should guarantee the ITB mix is more manageable within the computer and will guarantee a more controlled operation of the session.

Appendix 13 92 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 14: Stairway and gateway key for Aquilla Young and Creature Kind mixes

Stairway Aquilla Young Creature Kind

Who is the mix for? The artist The artist

Understand how mix systems Use systems that are going to These tracks must sound Indie and equipment generate their dirty these tracks up, overdriving Pop, In your face, Compression sound. preamps and driving or the overuse of compression

processors. More bottom end and bright punchy sounds. required in these tracks. Pultec Equalizers that push parts and Fairchild type sounds. forward.

Understand engineering skills ITB sessions limited to 48 tracks Presence and the ability to are a given. maximum and use of plugins create dynamics with volume

that are well known only. rides. These mixes need to be performances as I produced them and need more inspiration

Understand that the song and Tracks produced well, Tracks over-produced need to its production are essential. engineering limited sounds need find more clarity ion the mix by to be supercharged. perhaps muting some parts.

Use artists reference Lykke Li – Get Some Kids by MGMT. (Vagabond)

Explosions In The Sky – Let Me Back In (Tide)

Listen to the rough mix Quite good. A good reference Very congested, over produced for balance but the mix lacks and lacks clarity. some character.

‘Gateway’ Key

Key element Aquilla Young Creature Kind

Mental representation of how The vocals need to sit dominantly These tracks need to present mix should sound over tracks that project power and many hooks but not turn into depth. These songs are very cheesy pop. It is important the emotional and have a large creative softness of the vocalist’s style focus. They must come across does not dominate the tracks artistically they need to be alternate sounding.

Limiting creative factors The engineering is average and The tracks are overproduced. there are some timing issues.

Appendix 14 93 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Designing the mix system from Vagabond : Appendix 15 I’ll make you mine: Appendix 17 Stairways

Designing the mix system from Tide: Appendix 16 Forever: Appendix 18 Stairways

Appendix 14 94 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 15: OTB mix Vagabond (CD portfolio, track 14)

Analogue console routing

Channel Number Track Name Outboard equipment

1. Kick SSL 5000 eq /compressor

2. Snare SSL 5000 eq /compressor

3. Over heads left

4. Over heads right

5. Rack tom Dbx166 compressor (1980’s)

6. Floor tom Dbx166 compressor (1980’s)

7. Lead vocal Neve 51, Orban 356a, JLM La 500

8. Bass Neve 51, jbl 7110compressor

9. Drum rooms left SSL stereo buss compressor Clone, SSL 5000 eq

10. Drum rooms right SSL stereo buss compressor Clone, SSL 5000 eq

11. Acoustic guitar

12. Drum Mono amb Urei LA4

13. Tele Gtr left

14. Tele Gtr right

15. Bigsby Gtr left SSL 5000 eq

16. Bigsby Gtr right SSL 5000 eq

17. Keys left

18. Keys right

19. Jungle crew left Symetrix 525 compressor

left

20. Jungle Crew right Symetrix 525 compressor right

21. Choir left

22. Choir right

23. Backing Vocals left

24. Backing Vocals right

25. Effects, Reverbs, Reverbs, Reverse vocals left

26. Effects, Reverbs, Reverbs,

Appendix 15 95 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Reverse vocals right

27. Parallel Compression Kick Valley People dynamite compressor

28. Parallel Compression Snare Valley People dynamite compressor

29. Desk effects Yamaha Rev 500 L

30. Desk effects Yamaha Rev 500 R

Sub Master 1 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

Sub Master 2 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

Effects return 1 Desk effects Roland Srv 2000 L

Effects return 2 Desk effects Roland Srv 2000R

Effects return 3 Desk effects Yamaha Spx 90 L

Effects return 4 Desk effects Yamaha Spx 90 R Journal entry summary, Vagabond mixed OTB November 4th, 2014 a) This track was a huge session and required extensive organization to get the session to a manageable size. The problem with the rough mix was that the drums did not have the power needed to drive the track. I decided to use my closest compressor to a Fairchild to limit the mono ambient microphone only. I used my La-4 and really got some aggression out of the drums. I was thinking like the Beatles “Tomorrow never knows” this was the technique the engineer used on Ringo’s loop. It worked a treat. I also gave this track its own output so I could drive the channel on the desk specifically for my main drum mic. b) There were timing issues in the drums that made balancing very difficult. c) I drove nearly every channel on my desk (except effects) to give the mix some dirt. This really gave the mix some colour and added a lot of vibe to the sound. d) I added a lot of analogue tape delays on the vocals and on some guitars. This increased the spatiality of the mix and aided by giving contrasting depth to the pounding drum rhythm. e) The track took about 4 hours to balance and then I did about 2 hours of volume rides. This mix was difficult, very demanding and needed a lot of volume rides to bring some life and dynamics out of the tracking. f) It felt like a very creative experience, I really enjoyed mixing this song, it didn’t take to long and I came up with a lot of ideas (mainly delays) that added the additional flavour the client needed. g) Volume rides on the master fader were responsible for giving the mix the final touches that it needed to be dynamic enough.

Appendix 15 96 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven h) There was a need to distort the vocal a little; this came from the Stairways process. Once I was happy with that I tried a similar distortion on the bass. But ended up running the bass through a purple 2xl pedal. Awesome. i) No problems at all a hard mix but a great result.

Appendix 15 97 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 16: ITB mix Tide (CD portfolio, track 14)

ITB insert / outboard equipment patching

Pro tools output/insert Track name Outboard equipment

1. Kick SSL 5000 eq and compressor

2. Snare SSL 5000 eq and compressor

3. Lead vocal Neve 51, Orban 356a, Urei LA4

4. Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

5. Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

ITB software plugin routing

Aquilla Young Tide ITB flow chart

Track Name: Pro Auxiliary Outboard Tools Auxiliary master master inserts

Kick in Yes Kick master Kick out Yes

sn top Snare Master sn bottom

Hi hat

Oh L Oh Master

Oh R Master Drum aux: insert Tom 1 Tom Master Master with and NLS Tom 2 NLS Amb l Room Master Amb r

Drums 2 L Drums 2 master Drums 2 Right

Mono amb Mono amb master

Toms 2 l Toms 2 master Toms 2 right

Appendix 16 98 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Orchestral bass

drum

Tambo bam

Slow drums left Slow drums master Slow drums right

Bass di

bass mic 1 Bass Master with NLS bass mic 2

Bass distorted

Gtr pick: 4 tracks Gtr 1 Master stereo

Gtr 2: 4 tracks Gtr 2 Master stereo

Delay guitar 8 Delay gtr Master tracks stereo Gtr Master Lead Gtr 4: 2 tracks Lead gtr Master stereo with NLS

Harmony gtr 4 tracks

Phase gtr Gtr 5 Master

ebow gtr

Anjanette gtr

Pads stereo

Wurli stereo

Hammond Stereo

Korg stereo Keys Master with NLS

copicat

Pulse stereo

Roland rs202

L vocals Lead Vocal Master with NLS Yes

Bv's 10 tracks B vox Master with NLS stereo

Long reverb stereo

Short delay mono Fx Master with NLS

Ping png delay

Appendix 16 99 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

stereo

Plate stereo

Spring reverb

Non Lin reverb

Space echo

Long delay mono

Journal entry summary, Tide mixed ITB November 2nd, 2014. a) This session was huge I had to bounce down a lot of tracks to make the session manageable. I also decided to continue using the NLS plugin for consistency and set the mix up accordingly. b) The greatest challenge I face is adding the required spatiality to make the artist’s vision of swimming underwater come to life. I used multiple repeats on my Watkins copycat tape delay to simulate this feeling c) I drove the auxiliary masters (NLS Plugin) and all outboard processors to add as much colour to the mix as possible. This process took a lot longer than driving the console when mixing OTB as setting the gain structure ITB was a difficult task. Many layers of faders feeding more auxiliary masters to a final master. d) Having enormous difficulty getting the mix to sound clear enough. It seems to be quite muddy and unclear. This track has many subliminal synth layers that support the song and then 4 various guitar lines with 3 to four microphones each. It’s an enormous task to balance the song. What is missing here is that normally I can access many faders laid out in front of me. With my current controller I only have eight faders. Finding switching fader banks a pain in the proverbial. e) Why am I having trouble hearing? It feels like I am not hearing well. I can only put this down to using my eyes a lot more to equalize, compress and balance more, by looking at the screen. f) I have lost the vibe on this mix taking a break. g) Ok after about 4 hours I think I have got the track sounding balanced I needed to walk away. In the end, I actually deleted some of the synth parts so there is actually less playing. This could be because of over production. OR Digital summing? h) I have gone to bed last night feeling like I was a beaten man. This mix is incredibly hard to feel like I have pulled a quality mix out of it. The mix sounds how I want it to sound. BUT it just wasn’t clear enough. Crazy.

Appendix 16 100 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven i) After two days mixing I have finally done some master fader rides and an enormous amount of automation within Pro Tools. The mix is done. Crazy how long it took. But I think it sounds pretty good.

Appendix 16 101 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 17: OTB mix I’ll Make You Mine (CD portfolio, track 17)

Analogue console routing

\ Channel Number Track Name Outboard equipment

1. Kick SSL 5000 eq /compressor

2. Snare SSL 5000 eq /compressor

3. Overheads left

4. Overheads right

5. Rack tom Dbx166 compressor (1980’s)

6. Floor tom Dbx166 compressor (1980’s)

7. Lead vocal Neve 51, Orban 356a, Urei LA4

8. Bass Neve 51, jbl 7110compressor

9. Drum rooms left SSL stereo buss compressor Clone, SSL 5000 eq

10. Drum rooms right SSL stereo buss compressor Clone, SSL 5000 eq

11. 12 string left

12. 12 string right

13. Electric Guitar 1 left SSL 5000 eq

14. Electric Guitar 1 right SSL 5000 eq

15. Keys left SSL 5000 eq

16. Keys right SSL 5000 eq

17. Vocoder left

18. Vocoder 4 right

19. Extra drums Left

20. Extra drums Right

21. The Phoncurves Bv’s Left

22. The Phoncurves Bv’s Right

23. Backing Vocals left

24. Backing Vocals right

25. Effects, Reverbs, Reverbs, Reverse vocals left

26. Effects, Reverbs, Reverbs, Reverse vocals right

Appendix 17 102 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

27. Parallel Compression Kick Valley People dynamite compressor

28. Parallel Compression Snare Valley People dynamite compressor

29. Desk effects Yamaha Rev 500 L

30. Desk effects Yamaha Rev 500 R

Sub Master 1 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

Sub Master 2 Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

Effects return 1 Desk effects Roland Srv 2000 L

Effects return 2 Desk effects Roland Srv 2000R

Effects return 3 Desk effects Yamaha Spx 90 L

Effects return 4 Desk effects Yamaha Spx 90 R Journal entry summary, I’ll Make You Mine mixed OTB October 29th, 2014 a) These tracks are overproduced, to make up for average song writing. I overproduced them, So, how am I supposed to find inspiration to mix them appropriately? b) I continued with more programming and came up with the re intro effects and the outro effects during mix down. I programmed these whilst mixing. c) The drums required an enormous amount of work as they diversify in sound throughout the whole song. Funnily enough once I had made a decision on what I was to do the band track seemed to come together quite easily. d) Instead of wallowing in doubt I have gone with my instincts and it has worked. e) The hardest part of the mix is getting some life out of David’s average Vocal performance. His duet partner Erin has out performed him and I have had to minimize her influence in the chorus to make sure this track is perceived as a Creature Kind song, not an Erin Ross song. f) My smart c1 compressor is pounding away on the mix buss with a faster attack than usual but this is adding some nice grit and energy to the song. I am losing some bottom end but will put it back in during mastering. g) I felt the track required a baritone guitar line doubling the bass line from the 12-string solo out and performed this myself during the mix. h) I added the tambourine part as well to drive the rhythm of the song as well i) After three goes at master fader volume rides this mix is actually sounding really good. Very happy.

Appendix 17 103 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Appendix 18: ITB mix Forever (CD portfolio, track 18)

ITB insert / outboard equipment patching

Pro tools output/insert Track name Outboard equipment

1. Kick SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

2. Snare SSL 5000 EQ/compressor

3. Lead vocal Neve 51, Orban 356a, Urei LA4

4. Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

5. Master Mix Avedis E27, Smart C1

ITB software plugin routing

Forever ITB flow chart

Track Name: Pro Auxiliary Outboard Tools Auxiliary master master inserts

Kick in Yes Kick master Kick out Yes

sn top Snare Master sn bottom

Hi hat

Oh L Oh Master

Oh R

Tom 1 Tom Master Tom 2 Master Drum aux: insert Amb l Room Master Master with and NLS Amb r NLS Drums OD L Drums 2 master Drums OD R

Mono amb Mono amb master

Prog drums l Toms 2 master Prog drums right

Cowbell

Tambo

Perc and claps L Slow drums master Perc and Claps R

Appendix 18 104 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven

Key bass

bass mic 1 Bass Master with NLS bass mic 2

Bass distorted

Gtr Funk 1: 4 tracks Gtr 1 Master stereo

Gtr Funk 2: 4 tracks Gtr 2 Master stereo

Delay guitar 8 Delay gtr Master tracks stereo Gtr Master Lead Gtr 4: 2 tracks Lead gtr Master with NLS stereo

Harmony gtr 4 tracks

Ch gtr stereo Gtr 5 Master Filter gtr

Chug gtr gtr

Pads stereo

Wurli stereo

Juno Stereo

Korg stereo Keys Master with NLS

copicat

Bells stereo

Piano

L vocals Lead Vocal Master with NLS Yes

Bv's 30 tracks B vox Master with NLS bnced stereo

Long reverb stereo

Short delay mono

Ping png delay stereo

Plate stereo Fx Master with NLS Spring reverb

Non Lin reverb

Space echo

Long delay mono

Journal entry summary, Forever mixed OTB October 27th, 2014.

Appendix 18 105 Brendan Anthony The Stairways to Mixing Heaven a) This mix is taking so long to setup, the production is so diverse and over done (by myself) it is hard to find a direction. In an effort to get it done, I approached it as two sections. I mixed up to 1 min 11secs first then mixed the second half of the song. b) I am having trouble with this song, it seems a little clouded and not present enough to me. Taking a lot of time getting the balance I wanted. c) I have decided to hit the Alan Smart c1 mix buss compressor really hard to try and give some more life to the track and make it spit. d) I changed this track to 4 on the floor after the solo so glad I did. It seems to balance and feel so much better when this feel kicks in. e) The vocoder parts have been the hardest to balance, as they are quite thick in texture. The references given to me for this mix are all more up-tempo and it is hard to get the feel of an up tempo tune into a slow tune. I have decided to drive as many processors as possible. f) I actually hate this process it doesn’t feel like I am playing the mix system well enough. Like I am not really performing. My gosh there are like ten sub group masters inside the computer and I am forever having to flick through the screen and controller to find the fader I want. Not very conducive to how I like to mix. However, this mix system is much better than some of my first ITB designs. Thank god I bounced the song down to 48 tracks. g) I am succeeding however this is day 2 of the mix and I never take this long to mix a tune. h) End of the day the mix sounds good to me. It was not a very enjoyable process for me at all. However I think there are many factors that add to this. i) During this mix I had to take a break as I was getting so frustrated. It was here I listened to the OTB mix of Requiem; at times this mix gave me goose bumps. I need to find out why and what I did that was different.

Appendix 18 106