# Submixing the whole band, really???



## DaveCarter (Sep 30, 2009)

So the band I play in is really getting our shit together at the moment. We've moved from using a Korg Triton for our sequencing/samples to a laptop, so everything is in stereo high-quality audio. We've got our guitar rigs all MIDI'd up, patch switching is automated, we're looking at in-ear monitoring. But now the guy who handles the tech side wants to submix the entire band down to one stereo output 

We dont have our own drum mics yet, but that basically means for the next few shows the guy at the desk would get drums patched through as normal, then a stereo mix of the whole band. The laptop's synth/samples, both guitars, lead vocals, bass, the whole lot submixed to a stereo line out, eventually including drums when we have the mics. The plan is to guarantee us a great mix night after night, regardless of what venue we're in or who's on the desk.

But Im not convinced that its a good idea, Ive never seen any other rock/metal band work like this. There cant be a one-size-fits-all mix that works in ANY venue, and surely the guy on the desk needs control over the mix for a very good reason??

Opinions please!!

Cheers


----------



## scottro202 (Sep 30, 2009)

I don't see why you would want to go down to one output for your whole band. It sounds like what you guys had going before was working great.


----------



## DaveCarter (Sep 30, 2009)

We've had some fairly substandard mixes at gigs, things like my guitar being inaudible, bass being too loud, sampled backing vocals being WAY louder than the lead vocal. The thinking is that if we've prepared the mix ourselves, all the levels will be perfect every time and no-one on the desk can screw it up. Im just not convinced that its a good idea though, I think the guy on the desk still needs a certain amount of control.


----------



## Lozek (Oct 1, 2009)

I don't think that would be a good idea at all. I know exactly what you're saying about getting bad mixes from shitty engineers, but by doing this you'd be taking away their ability to create a good one given the chance. Every venue sounds different & will need different levels to sound 'the same'. What you want to be aiming for (which I think you probably already have) is making sure that the sound guy is getting good quality source sounds that don't require much tweaking. Things like triggering the drums, knowing the sweet spots on you cabinets & the mics that respond well to your sound will give you _some_ consistency at least.

It really comes down to the size of stage you are playing (ie bleed levels & even if the audience can hear your stage sound as well), the size/acoustic scenario of the room, and the MAJOR factor, how good the sound guy is!!!! There's not much getting around that.


----------



## DaveCarter (Oct 2, 2009)

Glad you agree! I actually put this idea to the sound engineers at the gig I was at last night, both professionals who do it for a living. The both agreed that it was a shit idea, and said we may even find that some engineers refuse to let us do it. We could also be refused bookings if we get a bad reputation from refusing to let anyone mix us properly. 

I'd put all this in an email and told him that I wasnt going to be going along with it, since I think its a shit idea. I got a huge email back explaining that basically he knows what he's doing*, I have no idea what Im talking about**, there's nothing you can do about crap acoustics, there's no such thing as bleed from the stage, how dare I question his ideas etc etc. He's not gonna budge on it so it looks like we basically have to go along with it, and wait to see what kind of results we get, not to mention reactions from sound engineers! This should be interesting 

*Despite having asked me before our first gig if I was "planning on micing up? Im sure if you set up your mic infront of the cab the sound guy wouldnt mind putting it through the PA for you"....yes....indeed....

**Despite having run the live sound in venues for 2 years for the Live Sound module of my music degree, and asked everyone I know who works in Live Sound for their opinion on it, ALL of whom agreed it wouldnt work.


----------



## Lozek (Oct 2, 2009)

Whose band is it? Is he actually a performer in the band with any kind of controlling factor? This is a situation where I would be inclined to throw my toys out of the pram & tell him you won't have your reputation tarnished & be talked down to by someone who's talking out of their arse. No-one else does sound that way, because it's a stupid idea.


----------



## darren (Oct 2, 2009)

Sending a submix of the whole band to the house is a bad idea, as it doesn't give the house engineer any flexibility to adjust levels to suit the venue. Room dynamics can change according to how many people are there, how loud your stage volume is, etc., and he may want to alter levels or apply reverb to vocals (for example) separately from the rest of the mix.


----------



## TomAwesome (Oct 2, 2009)

I think it depends on your situation. If you're working with a fairly competent sound guy, then don't do it. However, I've worked with a lot of sound guys who don't give a shit and who will purposely make you sound bad just for shits and giggles. If you're working with somebody you know will screw up your mix, then this might actually be worth a shot, but that's about the only situation in which I think it wouldn't be a bad idea.


----------



## DaveCarter (Oct 2, 2009)

Lozek said:


> Whose band is it? Is he actually a performer in the band with any kind of controlling factor? This is a situation where I would be inclined to throw my toys out of the pram & tell him you won't have your reputation tarnished & be talked down to by someone who's talking out of their arse. No-one else does sound that way, because it's a stupid idea.



Unfortunately. He's the other guitarist, main songwriter, and producer. Again, he's ignored any advice from anyone on how to mix, despite the fact people have slated his production before. Its alright but its not great, he insists on things like plugging amp heads straight in to the computer via a DI. Nolly suggested we use some kind of cabinet emulation but this guy totally ignored him.

He's not backing down, so Ive decided he can learn the hard way. I said we'll try it at our next few gigs and see what happens, and if it works we can carry on with it. He seemed to think I was somehow taking the piss so he's now resorted to foul language and petty insults. Yet apparently Im the one that needs to "grow the fuck up", lovely


----------



## TomAwesome (Oct 2, 2009)

He records preamps direct with no cab emulation? He does know how guitar rigs generally work and what role each part plays, right..?


----------



## DaveCarter (Oct 2, 2009)

TomAwesome said:


> He records preamps direct with no cab emulation? He does know how guitar rigs generally work and what role each part plays, right..?



Guitar > his marshall head > "Bluestone" D.I. from speaker output > computer. 

I have tried pointing out that heads are _supposed_ to be used with speaker cabs, but its not made any difference. Ive suggested cab emulation and he's not interested, even though people have commented on how "direct" the guitars sound. Id even rather we used a pod, as at least thats designed to be used on its own. No luck though. 

Since he wont listen to me, Im now waiting for a manager/producer/label to tell him further down the line how its supposed to be done. Sooner or later he wont be able to carry on doing it like that, and all shall be well!! Same goes for this submixing the whole band, he wont listen to me so I'll let him carry on, and sooner or later someone will hopefully make him realise what a fucking stupid idea it is!!


----------



## Dr Terror (Oct 14, 2009)

I'd try to fix this before it costs any more time or money. He can still get his tech wank on - but try to make your friend see that his method is best used for live recording & in ear monitors etc, but you definitely need separate signal sources for FOH sound to be all it can. Most decent interfaces have equal outputs/inputs, making it redundant to bounce down to stereo. Best of both worlds would be having your signature "Live Sound" generated by the Laptop, but adjusted for the room by the Sound guy using separate signal sources.


----------



## DaveCarter (Oct 14, 2009)

Yup, he's now realised that this idea isnt going to work at our level, so he's agreed to "put it on the backburner" for now until it becomes more practical. I dont think itll be a problem any more though, once we've played a fair-few gigs he'll hopefully realise that venues all sound different, PAs all sound different etc., so there's no such thing as a one-size-fits-all submix. Its not necessary to try it either, its just not our job to handle the mix, its the sound guy's job!! Rant over 

On the plus side, we've started rehearsing with the laptop and its amazing! All our samples/synths are now high-quality, stereo, audio files. Plus the drummer now has his own mixer and can adjust the levels of his in-ear monitoring (the band vs. click track), so he's happy. New tracks have been written, more gigs have been booked, happy days


----------



## McKay (Oct 28, 2009)

Doesn't sound to me like your band is 'getting it's shit together' if you're throwing insults at each other.

That guy needs a serious cup of STFU. Is he brain dead? Who the hell records guitars like that?


----------

