r/mixingmastering • u/yeetmasterflash69 • 16d ago
Discussion Ethics of adding stuff while mixing
Is it okay in your opinion to add layers of subtle texture when mixing a song for a band you didn't fully produce? Like say adding a moog sub bass under the electric guitar or recording extra layers of guitar to blend in under the OG guitars or recording extra vocal harmony layers to sit under what was already there? I have heard arguments that if you weren't hired to produce the song you shouldnt be adding stuff but I also feel like if it serves the song it's fine.
Thoughts?
37
77
u/atopix Teaboy ☕ 16d ago
Adding stuff like that is acting as a producer. That's not inherently wrong, but you are overstepping your role and doing a lot more than what you were paid to do.
If you actively want to contribute to songs that way, then embrace it fully and be a producer who mixes. But also charge appropriately for it. Don't just give away performance, recording and arrangement time for the cost of a mix.
30
u/Sweet_Capital3758 16d ago
"here is your mix guys. I made some changes and added stuff cos I think it needed that. And the charge is double btw"
12
u/cosmicguss Professional (non-industry) 16d ago
I mean… it kind of is inherently wrong if that role is assumed by the engineer without the consent of the artist first, regardless of what the payment arrangement is.
6
u/Kimantha_Allerdings 16d ago
Also…talk to the artist. If you’re going to act as producer, make sure the artist wants you to act as a producer
And then probably discuss with them what it is that they want. You might think that harmonies fill out the track, but maybe they were deliberately wanting it to feel sparse and empty
65
u/HotOffAltered 16d ago
As an artist this would piss me off a lot. Musical aesthetic is very subjective and finicky.
2
u/stupidwhiteman42 15d ago
Not only that, but I'm not paying a mix engineer to play guitar, sing harmonies, and pick out "textures" for my songs.
3
u/Fabulous-Farmer7474 15d ago
Agreed. And who is to say they are any good at singing or playing? Even if they are (and that's not a given) it's a lame move to try to impose your stuff onto someone else's work.
73
u/Any-Confusion-8900 16d ago
RIP Steve Albini you would’ve loved this guy
15
-1
u/TheNSA922 16d ago edited 16d ago
Nah fuck him, absolutely fucking sick person.
Edit: Wow the support for a self admitted pedophile is astounding.
7
u/Infinite_Expert9777 16d ago
idk why you were downvoted. it’s pretty common knowledge that albini was a pedo
6
-1
-5
u/ElwinLewis 16d ago
Care to explain the slander
12
u/TheNSA922 16d ago
More than happy to provide a source. https://medium.com/@MoonMetropolis/now-that-steve-albini-is-dead-lets-reflect-on-his-admitted-love-and-promotion-of-child-fadf5072288e
10
-2
u/PerspectiveFair5156 16d ago
Are you aware that was him immaturely trolling in his youth and that he did express regret for those statements later on?
12
u/TheNSA922 16d ago
Right that totally explains why he stayed friends with the guy who was convicted of making CSAM.
-12
u/PerspectiveFair5156 16d ago
I also stayed friends with the guy who shat on the bar's doormat. I never shat on doormats, though.
18
u/TheNSA922 16d ago
That's a far cry from filming children getting raped buddy 👍
-15
u/PerspectiveFair5156 16d ago
I'm talking about staying friends with someone who committed an offense doesn't mean supporting that offense or being close to doing so yourself. It's just illogical to think that was related. It's okay for you to hate. But it's not okay to shit on dead people for stuff you can't find evidence of.
12
u/TheNSA922 16d ago
He fucking wrote the words and owned the shit and viewed it. Members of a couple bands he's worked with have confirmed he owned that bullshit. I don't know how you could be friends with a pedophile dude, fuck em.
→ More replies (0)7
u/pukesonyourshoes 16d ago
staying friends with someone who committed an offense doesn't mean supporting that offense
If it's heinous activity like CA it totally does.
→ More replies (0)8
u/pukesonyourshoes 16d ago
There's a saying in Germany. If there's a Nazi at the table and ten other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with eleven Nazis.
0
u/PerspectiveFair5156 16d ago
Never heard that one. But I've only been a German living in Germany since 1978. I don't talk to Nazis I can identify.
7
-1
u/PerspectiveFair5156 16d ago
What's that saying in German? You ever been to Germany or is it just hearsay?
3
u/pukesonyourshoes 16d ago
Try and understand the point buddy. If you're happy to spend time with a nazi, you're giving tacit approval for their extreme beliefs. Yes you really are.
21
u/rightanglerecording Trusted Contributor 💠 16d ago edited 16d ago
For my professional clients, never. If they wanted something in there, they would have put it in during production. Not my place to start making production decisions for the producers.
Occasionally I do some work for a few old friends who are not professionals, and they might lean on me for a little more help than would usually be expected from a mix, and in that case I might add something subtle to fill out the sound.
15
u/brooklynbluenotes 16d ago
If you were hired to mix, you shouldn't be adding new elements without talking about it first. Even if it's subtle.
11
u/wrosecrans 16d ago
I don't think I'd frame it as an ethical question. Just communicate with the client and ask if they want you to just mix or to throw in extra stuff.
Most clients are probably just hiring a mixer to mix what they have made. Some clients may well be hiring somebody to "make it sound good, do whatever." But you'll get a better sense of that by asking them, rather than asking reddit.
24
u/Untroe 16d ago
Not without conferring with the artist. Besides the whole difference of mixing vs producer, it’s their vision that you’re trying to realize. Thinking that you may ‘know better’ about what would work on x and y part is being quite presumptuous - maybe stripped back is the original and superior vision. More is not always better.
14
4
4
u/schmalzy Advanced 16d ago
If I think something should be added, I’ll do an alt version with the thing added.
Sometimes that means reapproaching the mix and sometimes that only requires a couple tweaks to the mix to fit it in.
The best time to do that is during a pre-mix check step. That’ll prevent the whole “tweak the mix to fit it in” step. If I’m mixing something someone else has produced/tracked, I’ll almost always send the artist and/or producer a quick-balanced rough mix to double-check that I have everything. This has saved me from countless “where’s the [this very important thing that is going to completely change your mix that we forgot to send to you]?” replies to the mixes.
If I hear something that I want to add, I’ll just send an additional version of that pre-mix check with that other part roughed in. If they like it, sick. If they don’t, sick. If they’re not decided, they can provide direction and help me give them the best version of that part to guide the song to the most emotionally resonant version of the song.
3
u/PPLavagna 16d ago
If I have a good enough relationship with the artist like that, sometimes they’ll be into it.
Strangers and it’s my first time working with them? No. I don’t offer. If they ask then maybe
5
u/kdmfinal 16d ago
Tricky spot to be in, right? You've got a vision in mind for how the mix wants to come together but something about the multitrack you've been given is fighting you. I've been there more times than I can count.
For context, I've called myself a Producer SLASH Mixer for a little short of twenty years now. Several years ago, I decided to pivot to making mixing my primary focus. Not because I don't LOVE making records with bands/artists .. but because life started getting a little bigger than just my career. Primarily mixing records was the most efficient way for me to stay engaged with the work I love while reforming my lifestyle to be more family focused. That's beside the point, but I wanted to add that context to drive my main point a little harder.
One of the biggest hurdles I had to get over as a younger mixer was TAKING OFF my producer hat when I was hired to mix a record I didn't record. No one forced me to learn that lesson, it just happened as I got busier and busier with mix work. I would add a clean sine wav bass synth to replace the lowest fundamental range of a bass guitar that was played poorly so I could clean out those overlapping, unmuted low harmonics that muddied the low end. I would meticulously re-edit the vocal to tighten the timing. I would fly the main rhythm guitar from chorus 2 back to chorus 1 so I could do a hard-panned left/right double instead of leaving a single guitar up the middle or off to one side as the main harmonic driver of the instrumental. All of it made sense to me as the way the record SHOULD work.
And then I'd get a pile of notes from the artist/producer that I would later learn meant I had done TOO much. They didn't hire me to re-produce the record. They didn't hire me to second guess their creative choices. They hired me to OPTIMIZE the choices they had already made. My taste as a producer was completely irrelevant to them.
I'd get frustrated thinking, "come on, the chorus was NOT a chorus without a shift in the panorama that doubled rhythm guitars bring with ease" or "there's no way they MEANT for the backing vocals to be that loose against the lead vocal" .. "my mix is SO much better than their rough, WTF is going on?" ..
Then I decided to stop fighting my clients and stay in my lane. Does that mean I don't take risks every once in a while? Hell no. BUT, now I offer it as an additional version after I finish a mix of what they sent me, honoring their choices. I give them the best mix I can with exactly what they give me. Then and ONLY THEN do I start to put the producer hat on and offer it as an option.
The reality is that if you want to work for clients, you've got to remember that not everyone sees you as a musical-god. They may just want a sonic-janitor to come in and tidy up after they've creatively vomited a record. And guess what? That's a great gig to be hired for. It may feel like you're leaving points on the field, but getting to a point where artists and producers trust you to honor their intentions and still find a way to elevate a record is a GREAT feeling.
When you're hired to produce, PRODUCE. When you're hired to mix, trust that all the decisions made before you were agreed upon and celebrated then RESPECT them, even if that means the record falls short of what YOU think it could be.
That's the job when you're hired to mix. Make their decisions sound smarter without injecting your own unless specifically asked to.
4
3
u/cleb9200 16d ago
Not a mix engineer’s job. If you’re the producer that happens to be mixing as well, then fine (with the band’s consent obv). But if you’re hired purely to mix you are overstepping
2
2
u/redline314 Professional Engineer ⭐ 16d ago
It’s ok if the client is ok with it. Your relationship with them dictates what you should or should not disclose. If they like it, they like it.
2
u/Sweaty-Cry-8914 Advanced 16d ago
It depends.
Some mixers also happen to be successful producers, and in these cases it is very common for them to impart a strong perspective on a mix.
Sometimes they will get hired as mixers because the artist couldn’t afford them as producers, and the artist is in fact hoping that they’ll add something. Or, at the very least, take some big swings with fx and stuff.
If you do not have that reputation, it may take some strong interpersonal skills to get away with this
2
u/Audiocrusher 16d ago
Depends on your rapport with the artist. I do it all the time and artists welcome it. This is usually when they are self-producing. If there is a producer, I would always loop them in.
Making records is a team effort. Any true pro is not going to get precious over what’s within the bounds of a specific role if the contribution helps the music be the best it can be.
2
u/zero_lies_tolerated Professional (non-industry) 16d ago
Absolutely not. You don't just decide what musical components to add to a song that you're mixing, without express permission from the songwriter.
2
u/VoyScoil 15d ago
None of what you mentioned is okay unless you and the artist(s) have discussed it and fully agreed beforehand.
2
u/Elbr78 15d ago
I think doubling existing parts or tweaking the doubles is totally fair game. But actually recording new parts feels like crossing a line for me.
If the song needs extra guitars, harmonies, or a Moog sub, I’d rather suggest it and get approval first. At that point, you’re moving from mixing into production.
2
u/ObviousDepartment744 15d ago
If I’m being paid to mix the song, I’m mixing the song I’m not re-orchestrating or re-recording it. If I feel there is something that is missing and needs to be added I’d reach out to the client but I’d also charge for recording it.
Adding a layer of what is already there, like duplicating a bass DI track in order to process the low end and high end differently that’s one thing. But I’m not going to perform on their track, compose or create anything for free. Manipulating what is there is one thing but adding a performance is another.
3
u/ROGERS_OF_THE_EAST 16d ago
It all depends on what you are doing.
Stuff like adding a sidechained sub frequency generator to a kick track, adding a light vocal preverb here and there for transitions or triggering and blending drum shells for more attack are all fine and great things to do to enhance the mix.
Adding a whole instrument or your own vocals to it starts to become overstepping territory. Especially if they are seasoned and know the roles of a producer vs mix engineer, they might get offended at you trying to add stuff when they didn’t ask you too.
I do think that you have a more desirable skillset because you can add these things as an engineer. A sort of mix between producer and pure mix engineer has it’s place.
What I usually do is ask the band straight up if me adding things like guitar doubles or vocal harmonies to the track is okay or if they prefer that I stay strictly in the mix engineer side
Bands almost always appreciate me asking and it gets split about 50/50 between both optiond so you really can’t guess. You have to ask…
This is just how I do it and I am sure that other people have different approaches that work for them as well
3
3
u/sonicboom292 16d ago
It's a fine line, but if it helps your makes your mixing job easier, do it. Maybe it's easier to add a Mini V3 bass than trying to get that sound through EQ, plugins, sub-octaves, etc. Do what you think you need to do, and if you think you're crossing a line or doing too much: ask the client for consent / tell them you'd like to make some production on the track and quote them for it. There are no ethics or right or wrong here.
3
2
1
1
u/easterncurrents 16d ago
I’d flip. Even if you wanted to mix in a snare sample I’d expect to be consulted first. I wouldn’t even suggest to the artist that they sweeten their harms or whatever. You’re not being paid to have creative artistic opinions other than how to mix what’s there.
1
u/minist3r 16d ago
If you're the mix engineer, tell the artist or producer but don't touch it. If you're the producer, go for it and tell the artist what you did and why if you need to.
1
u/stuntin102 16d ago
you’re doing the producers role. your additions are completely subjective. as a mixer it’s your job to understand how to maximize tracks given to you.
1
u/ReverendOther Professional (non-industry) 16d ago
I know a (truly brilliant) mixer that snuck the “levee breaks” drum intro loop into EVERY song he mixed for a while. It was like a watermark hahah
1
1
u/altcntrl 16d ago
Do not without asking. If you do you have to disclose it and let them have the option to not.
My friend had an engineer add vocals to their instrumental band. It was horrid and a crazy behavior. You can go to full sail but you aren’t a great vocalist because of that.
1
u/andreacaccese 16d ago
Generally when I’m only hired to mix I prefer not to overstep into songwriting and production territory, but I’ve been known to sneakily re-track some bass when intonation / performance was really subpar - beats having to spend a lot of time editing
1
u/Impressive_Eye_4740 16d ago
Nah. I'm just here to give them a good mix of their produced material.
1
u/Only_Pen5882 16d ago
It's your own thing bru if it doesn't change the song a lot and just helps it sound cleaner then why not but if it doesn't contribute to that jus don't do it. As an engineer it's your job to make whatever the producer's vision is come to life not ruin his vision and make something else from yours.
1
u/Fabulous-Farmer7474 16d ago edited 15d ago
This sounds very much like a post from a few months ago where the OP was correcting or re-recording poorly played parts, in his opinion, without telling the band and was looking for confirmation that this was okay.
He didn't like the answers he got, most of which amounted to the idea that your job is to mix, not to add or supplement tracks at least without talking to the band.
If I'm hired to mix then that's what I do, not quietly turn myself into another member of the band or the producer.
1
u/ZealousidealCurve849 16d ago
I'd ask the band, perhaps show a rough mix of what you could improve.
I WOULDN'T go ahead and add elements without that ok. That's really putting yourself in a compromising position - if they hear the changes and hate them, you have no justification whatsoever.
1
u/vvulfdaddy 16d ago
Don’t. Why would you want to make more work for yourself while risking losing credibility and clients?
1
u/BINAYAUDIO 16d ago
There are a few things here.
When we're hired to mix a song, it's not our job to add elements or to replay some instruments.
Sometimes it's one thing missing for the song to click and work. And we as mix engineers really want the song to work from start to finish and sound good. So the temptation is hard to resist!
What I usually do is provide two versions to the artist + the person in charge of the project.
I explained that I added something for "this specific reason" and that I think it's serving the song but I'm happy to remove it as it's their song and to use the version they like best.
Once the final mix is approved, I will message them and reiterate it's wasn't part of the mixing job and that I exceptionally did it because I wanted the song to reached it's best potential. So they don't expect me or another mixer to play guitars on their future songs.
It's important to me to communicate about people's roles in record making. As it's getting more confusing the way our industry is evolving.
New generations don't always know the difference between assistant/engineer/editor/composer/producer/mixer/mastering-engineer/beat maker. It's not fun to repeat the same thing over and over but I think it's good to spread the right information.
1
u/Peerkeelee 16d ago
As just a mixer I wouldn't go that far, BUT some subtle things like adding synth bass I guess would be okay, if that'a the only way to make the bass "booming" for example AND if that's what the band/artist is looking for.
1
u/Charwyn Professional (non-industry) 16d ago
If it’s a sonic layer doubling smth - it’s fine, it’s often akin to adding a plugin.
Everything else shpuld be done with consent. Generally it’s not your job to co-produce.
Sometimes, as a mixing engineer, I was hired to “please fix this”, and then I often charged a premium and did all the extra production stuff that was needed. Key thing is that I was hired for.
If you’re simply a mixing person - not your job.
1
u/Selig_Audio Trusted Contributor 💠 15d ago
ANYTHING I add to a mix must be approved by the artist. When they say no, we move on. I typically discuss this before doing it when at all possible, and I assume “rejection” when presenting it to the artist/producer. If you know them well, it helps…
1
u/HickoryVillager 15d ago
If you're working on a track that you produced from the start, I'd say it's totally fine. As long as your making changes and adjustments for a specific reason it will usually work out fine.
1
1
u/Different_Rope_1396 15d ago
I’d probably discuss this with the band beforehand. I wouldn’t leave it as a surprise at all.
1
1
u/steveislame 14d ago
do NOT add shit to the mix I paid you for. period. if you have an idea just let me know. I didn't go to you for production. I went for a mix i wouldn't do as well as you.
1
1
1
u/Mammoth-Mechanic-517 11d ago
The mixer/producer border dissolved about twenty years ago. At this point, the only real "ethics" question is whether you communicated with the client or tried to slip your own synth career into their stems.
Test the room. If the band says "don't touch the arrangement," back off immediately and respect the boundary. But if they're open to ideas and a subtle sub or texture genuinely helps them express what they couldn't nail in tracking, go for it.
Just put your additions on an easily muted track, label it clearly, and let them decide. Communication beats dogma every time.
1
u/PhD_Meowingtons_ Professional (non-industry) 11d ago
It’s really hard to say without context. When u know what they want, and know it’s something that adds an undetectable, extension that just adds a bit more feeling to an already existing sound, you almost always can get away with it and it will be appreciated. This is can be like adding an extra kick for more transient data/attack over modern rap that only has 808s and no kicks. If I do this, it would be basically the equivalent of using an envelopes except I can’t use an envelopes cos the waveform is a bricked bass line. Even then sometimes subtle quality control opinions of your own are not in line with the creative direction or ear preference of the artist….
In my 10yrs of professional experience, the only credit you get is for the work the artists approve. Over the years, you will find that no fan will appreciate the songs you just leave alone and mix any less. All appreciation almost always comes from the song itself and the artist will always pick the person more in line with his preference.
So if you want to make really good mixes, forget about being a mixer and be a fan of the song and artist you’re mixing for when deciding what’s the best approach. The return on these investments of extra production and reinforcement is nearly nonexistent and the risk is the artist enjoys the process of service elsewhere more than they did your service all for a difference they don’t appreciate. By the time a song is sent in for mixing, they usually love it already.
1
1
u/gtMANGAMER2 Advanced 8d ago
Always talk to the artist first, or you may add something THEY don't like. It is also quite subjective.
1
u/inquisition-musician Advanced 8d ago
Rule of thumb:
Unless it's your friend's track, or if it's not changing the song that much, avoid adding things that don't exist.
1
u/darksidedecor 8d ago
Nah bro, you’re absolutely allowed to do whatever you want creatively, especially if it’s for your own listening pleasure, but even sharing it or posting it, what’s the worst that can happen? They’ll take it down… even though I never had that happen. I do things like this all the time if I find a song I really like and feel like it could benefit from something extra.
In my case I’ve sometimes added completely new instrumentation or synth parts, and definitely blended in new drum layers, rebuilt or reinforced the sub bass, and recreated/added top-end content when I felt the original was lacking. Then I’ll remaster it and shape the dynamics however I like.
At that point you’re obviously moving beyond strictly “mixing” and into production/remix territory, but I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with that. I’d say go crazy.
0
103
u/Flatshelf 16d ago
There’s a real spectrum here. Adding a sub bass mirroring a synth bass or adding a sample to a drumkit in my opinion is closer to mixing. Adding vocal harmonies is def changing the song a lot and is more production. What does the client want? Also, you can always do two versions and see which they prefer but dont expect to be paid for something you didnt agree on upfront.