Every trend has its anti-trend and I believe super clean mixes are no exception, with people being able to produce professional sounding tracks in their bedrooms we’ve conversely seen a rise in genres like Lo-Fi Hip Hop which actively go against the descriptions of clear and bright. I think these are an anti-trend to the highly polished pop songs of today and the reasons we enjoy them give insights into how and why we mix.
I think the answer is rooted in this concept I’ve called musical dirt.
What do I mean by dirty mixes?
This concept is best introduced with an example from the art world. Here we have two versions of the Mona Lisa by da Vinci and Prado. Lets ignore the historical context and just look at paintings themselves. Prado’s version feels like a more authentic recreation of the scene yet why is Da Vinci's version (arguably) more interesting? The dark and jaundiced canvas, enigmatic expression, alien background give the painting a sense of mystery. When one compares Prado's version it feels quite sterile. Both are obviously masters of their craft yet its the conscious imperfections in Da Vinci's version which makes it more interesting and unmistakably his own. In a musical context dirt is that idea of conscious imperfection (imperfection herein being not the ‘objective standard’) in both mixing and playing.These are the reasons I believe dirt works in mixes:
Humanisation, Context and Interest
1.Humanisation: Humans are imperfect creatures and the idiosyncrasies of a performance help you to grasp the musicians style and relate to them as a real person playing music. There is a reason people say music today is too sterile, it’s all loops and laptops. That’s not always a bad thing but it’s also not wrong.
For example let’s compare drum and bass with folk music (I’m making big generalisations I know but bear with me). D&B is a lot sonically richer, more technical but can be unemotional. Each drum and synth hit is the exact same(beyond some automation). In a Bob Dylan folk song not one strum of the guitar is the exact same, there might only be 3 chords in a song and his voice isn’t always in tune but that man still makes some beautiful music.
The difference between these two is where the context and emphasis lies. One could say Dylan’s music emphasises the lyrics so the imperfections in the music actually add to the human feel of the song and D&B emphasises sounds and intensity where more human drums might take away from the contistancy. Both are great genres in their own right and their own context.
2.Context: In David Byrne’ book ‘How Music Works” he talks about how context largely determines what is written etc.This idea that music is written to fit its acoustic context applies perfectly to Lo-Fi music. It’s not super clean, it sounds like someone in their bedroom made it. More than that a lot of it sounds like a bandpass filter on the master. Because it’s often created in bedrooms it fits the vibe of where it was created, its chill. Lofi Beats to study and chill to just fits right into the background with less bass so its not in your face and less high’s so its less present and sits in the background. To any producer looking at it objectively they’re bad mixes but really they’re just using dirt. The imperfection in the mix makes sense in the right context. That’s why we have to start looking at mixes less objectively and start looking at what sound they’re trying to achieve.
3.Interest: Adding more layers and small imperfections keeps the song sounding less like a sterile loop and more like a song someone made. It can create a stronger vibe or character in a song also. A simple example would be messing around with velocities and other automation. Even in how you play your instrument. Many people record 16 bars of guitar and loop it (myself included). This takes away from how you might play differently between chorus bridge etc. (While not necessarily dirt the idea still fits into what we’re trying to accomplish here). Adding dirt also gives people more to listen to 30+ listens down the line when they know every measure of a song. Pop songs chorus’ feel like a literal copy paste a lot of the time. There’s often no change in expression. While its clean its not dirty and interesting, it might sound worse but also more interesting, where you draw that line is for you to decide.
Example: Feel Good Inc
I think Damon Albarn is a master of dirty mixes. Feel Good Inc. by Gorillaz is a great example. All of the background mouth sounds, the slightly squeaky bass, strange background synths but most importantly, Damon Albarn's vocals. In all of the Gorillaz music I’ve heard there is a bandpass filter on his vocals (The highs and lows are filtered out). To any aspiring producer this would be ridiculous to do yet a man with all the tech at his fingertips decides to make his vocals sound worse? At the chorus the acoustic guitar is bandpassed and there’s vinyl crackle and white noise in the background too. A lot of these things would be actively left out, corrected or just not done by a producer so that the track sounds more professional. Yet the Gorillaz consciously add in these odd bits and strange imperfections.
All of these perfections humanise this song, it feels like actual people playing the music not just programmed beats and looped synths even though that’s what a lot of it is. Its creating the illusion of actual people playing. Listen to the bassline quickly and hear the 5th note the bass plays (0:25 in the vid). It does a big dirty squeak…Lots of producers (myself included) want to go perfecting the track so that there is not one single mistake in the attempt to make the song better. There is a difference between imperfection and conscious imperfection and really that’s where the lines blur heavily. Are J Dilla’s beats super funky and humanised or are they just out of time? A lot of people think he humanised the drum machine yet all he did was not fix anything. He chose to make conscious imperfections in his music and that became his sound. The same applies to Damon Albarn's vocals or Tame Impala's earlier records and literally all of Lo-Fi Hip Hop.
Conclusion: You gotta learn the rules before you break em
I hope no one will take this idea as an excuse to play badly or mix badly. That is absolutely not what I’m trying to accomplish here. What I am trying to do is explore the idea that conscious imperfection can have a direct benefit on your song in an artistic sense. What this requires is knowing when and where to use it. Damon Albarn can create a clean record if he wants I’m sure of it, but it’s not what he’s trying to accomplish. I personally think the line between imperfect and consciously imperfect is when you have to explain that you added imperfections intentionally. Your music should speak for itself.
What I am advocating is that people try and spend some time listening to their music as art and not production and decide when it’s ok to use that take where the guitar is a little squeaky but really nails the energy of the song or bandpass their drums because they think it’s sounds right in the context even if its less punchy. Once you’re good enough then sometimes you gotta forget the mix and just try and enjoy yourself and all of those micro imperfections in recording and mixing might just add to your personal sound.
I’d love to discuss this idea with people in the comments or via PM!
Submitted September 10, 2018 at 01:39AM by Kepler-18e https://ift.tt/2wW9pQq
No comments:
Post a Comment