Thursday, December 4, 2014

an open letter to the fucker at the mixing desk...

listen. people have been mixing things differently for different equipment for years. there's a substantial amount of 70s aor that's mixed for fm radio, and sometimes even specifically for cars. what that means is that if you're listening to your favourite zeppelin disk on a turntable then you're doing it wrong - pop it in your car, and you'll hear the drums and bass come out better through your trunk, if you still have that kind of system in your car (and you probably don't). in the late 70s, people started mixing things for clubs, and it's still something that defines essentially all dance music. when mtv hit, people started producing different video mixes for tv. you'll notice that if you track down old videos on youtube they're often mixed differently than the versions on the records, to compensate for crappy tv speakers. there was an industry built around "digital remasters", which was a reaction to the jump to compact discs. a lot of early idm is mixed specifically for headphones, and doesn't sound nearly as good when played through a set of actual speakers. more recently, some producers have started mixing tracks specifically for mp3, which means laying off the compression at the mastering stage because it's understood that the source is going to be compressed. i stumbled upon this myself in the late 90s, when i started realizing some of my songs sounded better through mp3. i didn't understand the role of compression in mastering at the time, and was essentially stumbling upon a crude form of mastering.

my music is eclectic, but it's broadly in a progressive rock tradition. what that means is that i'm mixing for reproduction. but i'm specifically mixing for reproduction over headphones. i make this very, very clear in my repeated requests for people to listen over headphones. but, you also need to be listening to it from a decent source - a stereo system, preferably.

it's not a question of one approach being better than another, it's just a question of how the music is meant to be listened to.

so, yes, i'm going to mix the bass in ways that may cause somebody's phone to explode. when i listen to my stuff on my laptop speakers, i often can't even hear the bottom end at all. but i don't fucking care about people that want to listen to music through shitty equipment. sorry.

i know that a lot of people want to be pragmatic about this, but i don't. it's going to be a function of any music that uses the spectrum in a complicated way - it's going to sound bad on cheap equipment. that's why it's cheap equipment...

as stupid as this is, you gotta understand it sounds better out of a car with a subwoofer in the trunk. it's easy to understand when you hear it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC-T0rC6m7I


and if you're trying to listen to this without phones, you're missing half the mix.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRUREWB_sJw

this is such an absurdly influential track, with such a mixed legacy.

on the one hand, you have to give it credit for defining punk rock. i know this isn't done very often. zeppelin are usually cited as the antithesis of punk rock, and their own fans are happy enough to wear that designation. zeppelin and queen get skipped over in favour of garage rock and a collection of acts vaguely defined as "proto-punk". but, when you line this or stone cold crazy up against the stooges or the sonics, it's pretty obvious what was more defining.

on the other hand, it's the earliest example of nordic metal and, by extension, black metal. this song created a fucking monster of epic proportions. it makes you want to burn every copy of it in a fucking funeral pyre.

as for the song itself, it's a solid riff and one of the few examples where robert plant isn't overwhelmingly annoying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC-T0rC6m7I