low quality for low quality

A

AdamThing

Guest
id like to open debate for a new situation. im wrapping up my first demo..working on the last track and then im going to mix everything down, polish it and master it a little. i intend to keep the quality as shitty as possible though in rough demo format. i have no intent to sell it, or make it a full release so i dont see the need for higher quality. being that the case i was thinking of using my old monitors still for reference. ive been using my m-audio AV40s for years and havent used my new KRK rokits yet for production on this demo as they are too big to even fit on my nightstand(yes i am ashamed thats where my computer is). once i move into my new place im going to lay down vocals for my demo and at that point ill have a new studio setup, new computer desk to fit my KRKs etc. im thinkin ill put my av40s in between my KRKs and my bose desktop speakers next to them or on top. this gives me three sets of reference. sure at that point i can kick the AV40s out but do i really need to if they still work? hmm opinions?
 
I have a motto I live by in the studio: Never delete, never throw out anything that still works.
Of course, keep those monitors for reference. Unless you find them as being a waste of space or you never use them again do not throw them out.
 
I wouldn't be concerned about doing one more mix on your old monitors even though you have new ones. New monitors don't instantly mean better mixes, particularly if you know your old monitors well and the new ones are unknown to you.

Some people like to have separate sets of bright and dark monitors. I feel that's very misleading for your work, particularly if neither one tells you what your song truly sounds like. Neither is reference, they're just opposing kinds of bad. You need to have one point to aim for: aiming for two leads you in circles.


The reason a studio often may have two sets of monitors is to judge how the mix sounds with limited bass. Both sets should be as clear, accurate, and detailed as possible. Both should be "reference quality". I accomplish this by having one set of very pure-sounding monitors that roll off the bass around 90 Hz. When I want to hear how a mix would sound on a bass-light system, I just turn off the subs.
 
AdamThing said:
id like to open debate for a new situation. im wrapping up my first demo..working on the last track and then im going to mix everything down, polish it and master it a little. i intend to keep the quality as shitty as possible though in rough demo format. i have no intent to sell it, or make it a full release so i dont see the need for higher quality.
Click to expand...

You "intend to keep the quality as shitty as possible"?

What does that even mean?

Why then are you "mixing", "polishing" and "mastering a little" (whatever that means:hmmm:)

Are you going to intentionally sabotage your mixes and recordings?

Why do any "mixing/polishing/mastering" at all if you "intend to keep it shitty sounding"?

Either you mix or you don't...


It is like baking a cake... if you know how to cook but "intend to make the cake quality as shitty as possible", do you just pour in a bunch of kitty litter, mustard and condoms so it tastes terrible?

Do you mean to say you are just going to do a very quick rough mix because it is just a little demo? that is very different from "as shitty as possible"

really just trying to understand what you are going for here.
 
For the original poster AdamThing, but acknowledging dvyce:

If you're never selling a track or releasing it, it doesn't matter how it translates. If it's just for you, maybe your friends, you really don't need to fuss over whether it was mixed on your old monitors or your new ones. Or any other set of rules for what gear or processes are "right" or "standard" according to somebody who isn't hearing your music on your speakers. Do what is right for you since you're the only audience.


Intentionally making something sound bad only makes sense in a grimy sort of way, like distorting the vocals, saturating the bass, and compressing the hell out of the drum room mics for a grungy sound. You're still aiming for good sound, just a very distinct flavor of good.


You've probably heard the expression "perfection is the enemy of progress". It's a whole lot better to release track after track that's pretty good than obsess forever over one unreleased track because it's not perfect. Just moving on is realistic, it's appropriate to where you are in your learning curve, and it's the best way to speed up your growth.

If you mean to say that you're intending to keep the quality (relatively) low so you remain productive, I follow 100%. I'll be there in two months myself: doing my very best to make each track as good as I can, but releasing too quickly to obsess over reaching perfection.
 
thanks for the responses. im going to do a rough mix of my demo and release it to the public. no intent to sell. i plan on making a full professional quality album to sell after that using my new monitors. at the same time im going to keep the old ones while they still work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top