Mix Translation: People Don't Listen In Treated Rooms Either - AcousticsInsider.com

[@stevenstembridge4864]

Really appreciate the down-to-earth approach to topics on your channel. Truly does remove the "voodoo" and allows us all to remember that production isn't magic, it's just making good decisions based on good research

[@MixMeMcGee]

I’ve been building a presentation for co-workers about just this and I’m *very* grateful you have your take

[@RudeRecording]

If your reference is faulty so will be your results. Flat is not exciting but part of a good mix is having a good tonal and level balance of instruments. If you don't have an accurate reference you are adjusting mixes by guess.

[@seungwoohan4258]

Fantastic video, thank you Jesco from Montreal, Canada!

[@sudd3660]

Mix Translation is up to us not the mixer, those who make the music has to make the best possible mix so with the best possible speaker and room it can sound its best.

[@arkh1730]

Having studios is not for everyone.only people who produce music from the ground up ..if your using samples alot you probly don't need a studio but if your sound designing you need 100%

[@emiel333]

I agree. Sound design is important. A couple samples in your track is fine. But not the whole track. Even people who use samples only should treat their studio. Or better: play (micro)deejay instead haha. 😂

[@markdelange980]

People listen in highly treated rooms. Your car, your living room. Highly dempened rooms....

[@emiel333]

Great topic. What we also must take in consideration is that headphones aren’t stereo. They’re binaural.

[@davidkulmaczewski4911]

The listener's room is a constant for that listener, and applies to everything they hear, so their experience is always relative. A better mix will sound better than a poor mix, regardless of the system. Trying to accommodate the deficiencies of a poor listening system seems like a poor practice. Of course, any mix should sound good in mono....

[@LasseHuhtala]

I hear a lot of producers talk about speaker resolution. -"Wow, the tweeters in these Blastor 5000's have such high resolution" Is it just voodoo or is it a real thing, and can it be measured?

[@BeattunersTV]

if you have a “high resolution” speaker and you want to hear all that resolution you need also a “high resolution” room. Its definetly better have “high resolution” room with some good priceles speakers against room with some high pressure peaks and reflection and high end speakers. Room doesnt care about your speakers, sound its just energy. If your frequenci response is like rollercoaster with some 10db peak on lows what you think is going to happen? :)

[@fredygump5578]

It's more your typical witchcraft and not actual voodoo per se. I would suggest looking up Floyd Toole. The comment about "resolution" may describe the directivity of the speaker, where narrow directivity speakers have a laser beam type clarity, whereas another speaker may be more omni-directional and a more diffused sound. With a nearfield monitor, you may find the "resolution" increases when aimed just so.

[@sudd3660]

why does it has to be measured? have you seen the people interpreting those? and now one talks about the things tings we can not measure or understand. its all about hearing, can trained people hear it or not. that is how you figure out if we are getting progress in the field.

[@splitradix]

@@sudd3660 We measure things because hearing is subjective. Accurate measurements are not subjective and that is one of the basics of how science works.

[@emiel333]

@@BeattunersTV That’s correct. 10 dB peaks in the low frequencies could be great for a casual listener that likes EDM or hiphop. But as a music producer you don’t want to have this peak. It impacts the low frequencies in your track badly. Measurements and data are statistics and thus facts. Hearing is subjective. And a room is in fact a speaker. It has is own sound. So I’m glad you’re writing “high resolution”. Finally someone who knows what it’s all about.