Harvey Gerst: Does it help to have the producer in during your mixes, even for a little while, or do you wait till you have your vision of the music before listening to suggestions?

Mixerman: I hate it when the producer starts to tell me his vision before I start mixing His vision is there, on tape. If he needs to explain it, he hasn't done his job right. Let me mix it. If it goes completely against what the producer planned, then good. At that point he needs to make a decision - does he like the imaginary vision that's in his head that may or may not work, or does he like the mix that's being presented to him right now?

Mixerman (continued): When it's a shocker, it's kind of funny. The producer will typically sit there, kind of stunned. LOL. I love that. Then they listen to it again.
And then if they don't like it, we can approach his vision, and see if it beats what I came up with. The bitch is when they decide they liked your way better after you changed everything. So I always print that mix. Not matter how much he might hate it. That's not the norm though. Usually we nip and tuck from where I have it, and it's pretty straight ahead. Like I said, if he did a good job, it will be very apparent what his vision is.

Moderator: You know, just a quick note - you guys that are sending in rude comments - that is not going to help get your other questions posted ... if you have never been to one of our chats before, let me break it to you gently - I am not going to respond to you in public, especially while there are plenty of intelligent questions in the stack ...

StoMo: What's your primary instrument? (Aside from Neve ...)

Mixerman: Piano and keyboards. I still play on an album occasionally. Nothing difficult though - I've got a lot of rust.

Pro Jules: How many hours of mix work is done by an assistant, with you not in the studio, instrument mixes, vocal up mixes, radio, TV etc? What do you delegate? How much time does it take?

Mixerman: None. The absolute most I'll ask my assistant to do is patch up the board in a certain way. On occasion I'll have him do 'window mutes,’ which are mutes around what's on tape. But that's rare. I like to mix from start to finish. It supplies me with the necessary time to get a vibe, and come up with my arrangement.

Mixerman (continued): For me this isn't factory work. I treat every record as a brand-new record. That's important to me. I don't really like it when you can start to really identify a guy’s mixes right off the bat, because he mixes them primarily the same way. That's no way to make records.

JR: Who's the greatest mastering engineer you have worked with?

Mixerman: Dave Collins. I think the guy is the greatest mastering engineer in the world.

And I'll tell you why. I've used a lot of mastering engineers. If they're semi-famous (in the audio world), they've probably mastered a record for me. Dave is one of the few mastering engineers who send back a master sounding better than when it went in.

BetterMixr: What did you think of the mix comparison files that Brad Cobb did? Last I heard you were going to listen to them and then you haven't said anything about it since. What did you think of those samples? Did they confirm your suspicions?

Mixerman: I have not heard them. In fact, I was supposed to get them last Saturday, but my session went over, and I couldn't hook up. I think Brad's test is flawed. I still want to hear it, but I'm not liking the way he did the test. It's not pure. I have to do the test again myself, and with some obvious pro digi people there, and it's going to be on film.

Mixerman (continued): You'll be able to get it in DVD format if everything goes as planned. I also think it's bogus that people are listening to a test through Pro Tools.
You have to get that out of the test - I'm sorry, rephrase - It's a bit incestuous to listen to a test through the hardware that the test was done with.

DaveCarlock: Regarding food in the studio, would you go with something like All-American Burger for Bruce Springsteen and then look to something like Roscoe's to mix R&B?

Mixerman: LOL… still laughing. I enjoy Roscoe’s. But I don't eat it very often.
I try to eat healthy, so burgers are out too. I think I'd eat anywhere the Boss wanted to.

How about that?

MadMoose: What do you expect from your assistant? What does he do while your mixing?

Mixerman: I probably don't expect enough out of my assistant. Usually they're just sitting around reading, when I'm mixing. When I'm tracking, I expect them to mark settings on amps, write down what guitar was used on what song, with what amp. Mark down compressor settings and Pultec settings between takes.

Mixerman (continued): I'm usually changing mics and compressors between songs to tailor the sounds to the song. So it's a lot of information to keep track of. I write my own track sheets. Other than that, it's up to my assistant to make sure that everything else is documented. That everyone has water, candles, tea, incense, and to watch my back and make sure I'm not missing something - like the bass player switched basses without telling me and now the bass tracks are pinning, that sort of thing.

master_man: When or if you ever mix the same compressed and dry signal together, does the phase difference bother you?

Mixerman: LOL! (lots of laughing) Still laughing. There is no phase difference. That's a bunch of bullshit. Yeah, I've read some people that think that. But I've been combining signals like this in mixes for years, and I've NEVER heard anything that even remotely resembles phase coherency problems or comb filtering. That's some voodoo shit there.

Henchman: Its funny how everybody is almost skipping over 96k and going directly to 192. However, don't you think a WELL-DESIGNED 96k DAW should be enough?

Mixerman: I think that what I've heard of 96K is NOT better than 48k. I don't think that was the answer and yet we are going to push forward. I did a mix to 192k, and al I can say is weird, weird, weird. Look what we want out of digital is absolute accuracy, right?

When I did my A/B's of 48k v. 96k Radar stuff, the 48k was way more accurate.
The 192 mixes I did were just bright. Way brighter than what I put in there.

Mixerman (continued): Digital already has a problem in that things don't sound 'glued' together. Opening it up has just made that problem worse to me. Now the jury is still out. But so far, I've not been impressed. I'm going to be working at 48k for a while longer. Perhaps 96k will be better for classical. I don't know. But for rock, I don't think it's better.

alphajerk: When do you think analog hit full maturity?

Mixerman: 1972? LOL. I don't know. It depends on whether your talking quality of sound or usefulness. I love the sound of the Ampex machines at Cello, but you can't punch for shit on those things. I love the sound of the Studer A800's too. Hell I like the sound of a lot of 2-in machines. I'll use whatever's there.