-09.05.2024-
It is often said that we first discern, and then we improve. Good vs. bad, lurking in this simplistic balance is the grey area of seeming ineffability – especially when it comes to mixing as a vital stage in today’s music production. Before rushing hastily into coming up with a set of criteria as well-rounded as possible to tackle this question fini, which will be touched on later on, I would argue that it is crucial to first establish a relatively clear definition of ‘a mix’ for this particular context.
A mix can be viewed as static; regardless of how many versions a mixing engineer provides, the final product of the mixing process tends to be fixed. On the other hand, since mixing as a process involves contacts with various parties, including the mixing engineer and beyond, it is fluid instead of static in terms of relations with these parties. Even if we do recognize the static final product(s) as the whole story of a mix, the nature of music in the broader context to be an activity, not a thing, according to Christopher Small[1], determines that given the static product(s), they would also inevitably engage in the different courses of the activities of music such product(s) captured.
That being said, no matter if we regard a mix to be static or fluid, discerning the quality of ‘a mix’ requires approaching it from multiple angles within the context of ‘musicking.’ To be more specific, this essay would attempt to reflect on some of the shared or exclusively valued perspectives by all artists (composer, producer, singer, etc.), mixing engineers, master engineers, agents, and audiences regarding physical and aural comfort, intentionalism, and commercial success. Subsequently, these discussions will collectively enhance our understanding of what constitutes a good versus a bad mix on a broader scale.
In my belief, despite the roles we might undertake in the various activities in the musicking process that could alter our focus, habit, and value system on approaching, hearing, listening, and evaluating music – and in this particular case – a mix, one of the most immediate and tangible aspects is physical and aural comfort. By physical, I mean it is apparent that as we receive music in the form of sound waves, the physical interactions between the sound waves and our hearing system pose a direct impact on our perception, such as hearing fatigue, given a mix that is too loud, too harsh, too dynamic, or completely lacking in dynamics, and difficulties in audibility, given particular parts in a mix that is too quiet or masked by others. On the other hand, overall, aural comfort deals not only with physical facts but also our emotions, with psychology and cognition hidden inside as two of the most significant fields when it comes to understanding music.
Music has a direct line to our emotions, often bypassing the more rational parts of our brain and tapping into our subconscious. This connection is mediated through various cognitive processes. Our brains process music by breaking it down into its constituent parts, such as pitch, tempo, and timbre, before reassembling them into a coherent whole. This process allows us to experience music as a narrative, where shifts in dynamics, key changes, melody, harmony, and other musical elements can lead to corresponding influence on brain activities, psychological state, cognitive functioning, and emotional states[2], [3]. That being said, the capability to create such comforts and the daring choices to be made to break the comforts, if necessary, constitute the first dimension of evaluation.
Another crucial dimension in evaluating a mix is intentionalism – the extent to which the mix faithfully conveys the artist’s intended message, mood, and aesthetic. While physical and aural comfort is more of addressing the technical execution of a mix, intentionalism is more concerned with the interpretive and creative aspects, ensuring that the mix aligns with the artistic vision. From the perspective of the artist, intentionalism is paramount (generally speaking). Every element of a mix – the placement of instruments, the dynamics, the effect – should serve the larger narrative or emotional journey that the artist seeks to create. Then, beyond the point of fulfilling the pre-existent intentions of the artists, the mixing engineer starts to introduce new intentions and new creations.
Therefore, the mixing engineer must act as both a translator and an interpreter of the artist’s intention. This requires a deep understanding of the genre, the lyrical content, and the overall mood of the track. The engineer’s role is not merely to make the mix sound ‘good’ in a technical sense but to make it resonate with the intended emotional or conceptual framework. In Mix Smart by Alexander U. Case[4], the mixing process is described as ‘fix-fit-feature.’ That is, mastering the balance between technical skill and artistic interpretation is what separates a competent mix from an exceptional one. From the first F to the last, a mixing engineer sets off from ‘duty’ and then wades ‘beyond.’ A mix that is technically flawless but fails to capture the art can feel sterile or disconnected, while a mix that prioritizes intentionalism can communicate the deeper layers of meaning within the music, even if some technical imperfections remain. In essence, intentionalism in mixing is about fidelity to the vision. A good mix is one that not only sounds pleasing but also communicates the intended message, emotion, or atmosphere, allowing the listener to connect with the music on a deeper level.
At the end of the day, while artistic intent and technical excellence are fundamental to a good mix, commercial success is the ultimate litmus test in the competitive world of music production – and the mixing engineer plays a crucial role in shaping the mix to meet commercial standards, often involving balancing artistic originality with the need to fit within the sonic landscape of the genre. In some cases, while an experimental approach to mixing might be artistically satisfying, it may need to be tempered to some degree to ensure that the track is competitive compared other hits in the same genre. This balance is delicate; the engineer must maintain the uniqueness of the track while ensuring it adheres to the sonic norms that make it palatable to a large audience.
Moreover, a commercially successful mix must be adjusted for various listening environments and platforms. In today’s digital age, music is consumed on a wide range of devices, from high-end audio systems to smartphones and earbuds. The mix must translate well across all these platforms, ensuring that it sounds good regardless of the playback device. This often involves mastering the track for different formats, including streaming services, radio, and physical media, each with its own technical requirements and limitations. Besides, it may also involve a strategic understanding of how the mix will perform in different contexts, such as live performances, music videos, and promotional campaigns. For example, a mix that works well in a studio setting might need to be adjusted for live play, where different dynamics and loudness levels are preferred. Understanding these nuances can make the difference between a track that merely exists in the market and one that thrives.
That being said, after all the measures, standards, and criteria discussed, getting back to a mix per se, it's magic that affects our emotions exactly by manipulating our psychology and cognition. As the art of blending various elements of tracks to create a cohesive and emotionally resonant whole, different aspects of mixing, such as dynamic, frequency balance, spatialization, and automation, play pivotal roles in shaping the listener’s emotional experience on top of the foundation for emotional impact built in the composition while having the hazardous potentials to damage the music.
As a starting point, proper dynamic control is essential for preserving the emotional peaks and valleys of a piece. For instance, a build-up in volume can heighten tension and anticipation, leading to an emotionally powerful climax, while, conversely, a sudden drop in volume can create a moment of intimacy or vulnerability. On the contrary, common mistakes like over-compression, however, can flatten these dynamics, leading to a loss of emotional waves and preventing the listener from experiencing the intended emotional ups and downs.
Next, the frequency spectrum plays a critical role in setting the mood of a track. Low frequencies, such as those of a bass or kick drum, can create a sense of warmth, power, or even menace, depending on how they are arranged and mixed, while high frequencies, on the other hand, can add brightness, clarity, and excitement. Poor EQing decisions, such as excessive boosting of certain frequencies, can lead to listener fatigue (breaking the comfort mistakenly). A mix with too much high-end can sound harsh, while a mix with too much low-end can feel muddy and boxy, both of which can detract from the music.
Third, by carefully placing elements in the stereo field and using techniques like reverb and delay, a mix engineer can create a three-dimensional soundscape that enhances the emotional experience. For example, placing a vocal track slightly off-center with a touch of reverb can create a sense of intimacy, as if the singer is slightly removed from the listener, evoking introspection or melancholy, while a wide stereo spread with elements panned hard left and right can create a sense of grandeur or excitement, making the listener feel enveloped by the music. Incorrect spatialization, such as placing too many elements in the same part of the stereo field or overusing reverb, can lead to a muddy, cluttered, or distant mix, reducing the emotional clarity and impact.
On top of that, automation in mixing allows for dynamic changes in volume, panning, and other specificities for effects over time. This can be used to enhance the emotional flow of a track, guiding the listener through the intended direction. A gradually increased the reverb on a vocal track during a build-up can create a growing sense of space and tension, which is then released when the reverb is abruptly cut off at the climax; while a suddenly removed masking filter from a track could introduce openness and brightness in a snap. Automation can also be used to subtly highlight certain elements at key emotional moments, such as bringing up the volume of a particular section during a particularly poignant section, casting spotlights on the elements that need extra attention.
However, none of the mentioned aspects could stand alone without proper balancing techniques at the beginning to lay out the foundations for further improvements. A well-balanced mix keeps the focal point of the track, whether it’s the vocal, a particular instrument, or a specific effect. This ensures that the listener’s attention is drawn to the most emotionally significant elements, enhancing their connection to the music. Meanwhile, it is also significant for a good balance to ensure each of the elements that are meant to be present in the music can be heard clearly without any one part overpowering the other and no frequency range masks (overwhelms) the others, allowing the emotional message of each element to come through clearly.
To end this essay with a case study, Bohemian Rhapsody by Queen[5] is a masterclass in balancing. The song features a wide range of elements, including operatic vocals, intricate guitar solos, and dynamic shifts between different sections. Despite the complexity of the arrangement, the mix remains clear and cohesive, with each element perfectly balanced to contribute to the overall impact of the song. For example, the shifting panning of the background vocals in contrast with the shortly-appeared lead vocal built a clear ambiance space on the stereo track; when the verse begins, the bass guitar underpins the backbone of the music and solidly supports the brightly enchanting vocal of Freddie Mercury before the drum kicks in and then blends naturally with the kick drum; during the operatic section, the vocals are carefully panned, layered and balanced to create a rich, harmonious sound in the surrounding and representing different characters from different angles in the stereo image. The guitars and drums are then gradually brought up in the mix as the song transitions into the rock section, creating a powerful contrast that heightens the emotional intensity. The balance between these elements is crucial to the song's success, allowing it to maintain its focus and impact throughout its various sections.
In conclusion, the art of mixing is an essential and nuanced aspect of music production that requires a delicate balance between technical skill, artistic vision, and commercial sensibility. A truly exceptional mix is one that not only meets and mediates among these diverse demands but also transcends them, creating a lasting emotional impact that resonates with listeners long after the final note has faded.
[1] Christopher Small, Musicking : The Meanings of Performing and Listening (Wesleyan University Press, 1998).
[2] Stefan Koelsch, “Brain Correlates of Music-Evoked Emotions,” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 15, no. 3 (February 20, 2014): 170–80, https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3666.
[3] Patrik N. Juslin and Daniel Västfjäll, “Emotional Responses to Music: The Need to Consider Underlying Mechanisms,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31, no. 6 (December 2008), https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x08006079.
[4] Alexander U Case, Mix Smart : Pro Audio Tips for Your Multitrack Mix (Waltham, Ma: Focal Press, 2011).
[5] Queen, “Queen - Bohemian Rhapsody (Official Video),” YouTube, August 1, 2008, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ9rUzIMcZQ.
Comments