It's hilarious to read these posts about mixing in regular headphones (or even with Canopener, etc.) when the greatest leap forward in audio monitoring technology in 80 years is staring everyone in the face for a very reasonable price: virtual room+speaker modeling.
Afaict Slate has done the best job of it by modeling real expensive spaces with VSX (incredible product), but there are other products out there too.
Ignore this development at your own workflow peril. Even if you have a $100,000 treated mastering room, you can make very good use of this brand new incredible tech.
And a crossfeed plugin like canopener (Its the best one I've used by a mile). Crossfeed delay compensates for the totally unnatural stereo imaging inherent with headphones. It is absolutely as important as EQ correction IMO. https://goodhertz.co/canopener-studio/
You also need to be very aware of volume (keep it LOW) and ear fatigue. Take alot of breaks.
Also you should have some acceptable monitors to check your headphone mixes against. I use Kali LP-6's
Mixing on headphones if done right is significantly cheaper and more accurate than monitors because you effectively remove your (inevitably crappy sounding) room from the equation. My mix room is a treated spare bedroom. There is no amount of treatment that will get a small room anywhere near as flat as EQ corrected headphones ESPECIALLY in the critical low end.
LOL... looks like this is a necro thread that I already responded to. Oh well... consider this an update to my original post
Interesting points. DT-880 is semi-open but some claim that closed-back is fine with headphone software. For example, Realphones includes correction and room emulation (crossfeed, azimuth, reflections) in one app.
Like someone else mentioned, this software is helping me use my speakers better. My room is treated but the bass on my previous mixes has been less than great. Hopefully a combination of these two tools will help me improve.
As far as small rooms go, you can get a flat response as long as you're close enough to the speakers. The real issue will be ringing - especially if your room has dimensional multiples (8x8x16, for instance). That'll cause the ringing to bunch up and over-emphasize a narrow band; usually around 70Hz. Situations like this may warrant resonant absorbers but you can get pretty far with 8" rigid or 2' of fluffy and 15-20% surface coverage. Of course, most people don't go that far.
Interesting points. DT-880 is semi-open but some claim that closed-back is fine with headphone software. For example, Realphones includes correction and room emulation (crossfeed, azimuth, reflections) in one app.
Like someone else mentioned, this software is helping me use my speakers better. My room is treated but the bass on my previous mixes has been less than great. Hopefully a combination of these two tools will help me improve.
As far as small rooms go, you can get a flat response as long as you're close enough to the speakers. The real issue will be ringing - especially if your room has dimensional multiples (8x8x16, for instance). That'll cause the ringing to bunch up and over-emphasize a narrow band; usually around 70Hz. Situations like this may warrant resonant absorbers but you can get pretty far with 8" rigid or 2' of fluffy and 15-20% surface coverage. Of course, most people don't go that far.
Open or semi open back headphones can have a flatter response with less resonance than closed back. Also closed back headphones bass response is dependent on the quality of the ear seal (which degrades over time) whereas open back cans are not. I also find semi/open back cans to be more comfortable than closed back - both in terms of fit and ear fatigue.
There is a reason "reference" or "critical Listening" headphones are almost exclusively open back.
Open or semi open back headphones can have a flatter response with less resonance than closed back. Also closed back headphones bass response is dependent on the quality of the ear seal (which degrades over time) whereas open back cans are not. I also find semi/open back cans to be more comfortable than closed back - both in terms of fit and ear fatigue.
There is a reason "reference" or "critical Listening" headphones are almost exclusively open back.
It's hilarious to read these posts about mixing in regular headphones (or even with Canopener, etc.) when the greatest leap forward in audio monitoring technology in 80 years is staring everyone in the face for a very reasonable price: virtual room+speaker modeling.
Afaict Slate has done the best job of it by modeling real expensive spaces with VSX (incredible product), but there are other products out there too.
Ignore this development at your own workflow peril. Even if you have a $100,000 treated mastering room, you can make very good use of this brand new incredible tech.
I tried some of these products and EQ correction combined with crossfeed sounds much more natural to me than introducing a simulated speaker into a simulated room. Why would I want to simulate a speaker and its EQ curve (none of those speakers are flat) into a simulated room with its EQ curve when I can just flatten the EQ curve of my headphones? It doesnt make sense to me. Every time I turn on "room simulation" it sounds worse than just EQ correction. Speaker simulation can be useful if you want to see how your mix translates through different sources but I wouldn't want to actually mix through a simulated speaker when I have the option to mix through a nearly flat EQ curve.
Some big shot mixer uses Sony MDR-7506 (closed)
I have the Shure SRH840 (also closed) and they translate very well.
Yup... thats true. If your mixes translate then that's all that matters. That particular pro mixer (Andrew Scheps?) is very used to those Sony headphones (which apparently are notoriously bright). You can learn to compensate for almost anything.
I'd prefer not to have to compensate at all. The tools we have available now make that possible. With EQ correction you can trust what you're hearing is accurate without having to "learn" the frequency response of a given set of cans.
Open vs closed is a preference. I prefer open for mixing and closed for tracking.
Yup... thats true. If your mixes translate then that's all that matters. That particular pro mixer (Andrew Scheps?) is very used to those Sony headphones (which apparently are notoriously bright). You can learn to compensate for almost anything.
I'd prefer not to have to compensate at all. The tools we have available now make that possible. With EQ correction you can trust what you're hearing is accurate without having to "learn" the frequency response of a given set of cans.
Open vs closed is a preference. I prefer open for mixing and closed for tracking.
Makes sense, but...
When I picked the Shure, it was because I just liked them in the shop. Played some music, and they were the ones that made more sense, audio-wise.
It didn't take me long to get used to them, and I don't use any correction software. Just listening to a lot of music on them, and just mix. I used to play the mix on speakers to check it, but now I'm confident, I just mix and apply the revisions I'm asked, and that's it.
There is a guy that is mastering exclusively on headphones ! I don't remember where did i found this but he worked on some grammys record.
Mixing on headphones is totally doable. Mono listening is very important as one of the first answer say, if you're not using any "stereo speakers faking" plugins.
Why would I want to simulate a speaker and its EQ curve (none of those speakers are flat) into a simulated room with its EQ curve when I can just flatten the EQ curve of my headphones? It doesnt make sense to me.
Me too - I only use the headphone corrections in SoundID. If I want to listen to crappy speakers I have plenty around - Alexa Echo Dot, 2" speaker in my mini desktop, pair of Sonus 1's etc. SoundID has a "mono" button - wish it had crossfeed (-1 point for SonarWorks) but easy enough to use a plugin for that ...
Slate VSX is OUTSTANDING!!! I thought it was gonna suck like the Waves version, but a few pros I know started using them and were raving about them... like holy crap its unbelievable. Put on the Archon midfields and you'll have eliminated 90% of your monitoring problems.
I decided to give you my simplistic approach to "Mixing on Headphones in a DAW".
Disclaimer:
· this sort of a guide is intended towards DAW environment with CORE or ASIO audio stream (corresponding drivers of your sound card)
· for listening to music using headphones (OS system overall sound routing) I will make another guide, as it requires much more work and considerations
· I will try to be short and concise as possible, but keep in mind this is not a newbie subject
· for surround sources this guide probably won't be suitable; for mono or stereo source recordings\tracks works great!
Prerequisites:
· assuming you have headphones (it is recommended to have good brand)
This site (link below) is the best one to compare and find your (next\current) headphones!
(extensive options, choose\add\remove brand\model, type of comparison... mind-blowing!)
1· you have a fairly decent sound card (I have NI Komplete 6 and Presonus 24c, really quite basic) with its own ASIO drivers installed (for Windows)
*for Apple Mac probably drivers are different (I can't remember how was it)
2· DAW (Digital Audio Workstation): Reaper, Cubase, Samplitude, Cakewalk, Studio One, Ableton, etc.
3· studio monitors (usually stereo pair) Impulse Responses; scientific for the most sources I use, capturing the monitors, the binaural headset microphones and the studio room environment (I will provide you with mine in the links below)
4· EQ compensation (ReaEQ is enough) with volume level compensation
5. final limiter (not needed but is a good precaution!) and level compensation (volume)
* I use the free 'Limeter№6' by VladG (its modern and paid version is called 'TDR Limiter 6 GE') Limiter №6
6· final manual EQ headphone correction (on the MonitoringFX for most scenarios, as we do not want this to get printed in our final Mixdown)
- ReaEQ is enough; the correction curve is not exactly the same (actually flipped) as the ones used for direct measurement from the freq.\sensitivity response tech. data, because we have already used 'studio monitors impulse responses' + 'binaural headset microphones' + 'studio room acoustics' with their own spectrum colouration)
- usually final EQ shaping using 'pink noise generator' plugin as sound source and notching down certain resonance frequencies (EQ cuts) is enough (I will show mine)
7· proper routing in the DAW (Reaper) and FXChain preset (I will provide you with mine) and it is perfect for stereo and mono sources
****************************
1· Download and use a pair (both) ['studio monitors impulse responses' + 'binaural headset microphones' + 'studio room acoustics'] stereo files for your sample-rate:
44100Hz, 48kHz, 88kHZ, 96kHZ are provided.
2. Now go an open Reaper!
Create a track. Probably by default it will be a stereo track (having 2 Track channels, it covers mono as well).
3. Load up the 'Stereo separated sample.wav' in that track and... follow the instructions in the provided downloadable files below!
I would still try and get a decent monitor setup if I was you. But, if you have some decent cans, and have to mix on them. Then learning them well will help more than anything. Use reference tracks in the cans to give you a baseline.
You can use just about any gear if you learn it well enough. I used BX8a monitors for over 10 years before I upgraded to Yamaha. But after 4 years on the BX8a, my mixes were translating so well. After 10 years, I knew every single lie those monitors would tell me, and how to compensate for it.
It's more about learning what you don't hear, than you do. And the lies they tell you. But you still need to double check your mix on some monitors if possible. And I still advise Monitors over Cans any day personally.
I would still try and get a decent monitor setup if I was you.
It's more about learning what you don't hear, than you do. And the lies they tell you. But you still need to double check your mix on some monitors if possible.
Monitors are loud. For a proper feel and balance you'd need about ~80dB of sound level and that is a lot for most people, who usually do not have a dedicated studio room for audio and mixing.
Also the room itself has to be acoustically treated... at least to some extent.
And to be honest, 80% of todays music is blasted through all kinds of headphones: phone, laptop
The only exception might be the car.
I do not see any reason of bothering people with weird jazz, metal, ethno music. Headphones is the solution!
See this site for exceptionally well done help with ‘phones. He even has a free reaper setup for mastering which compares the mastered track with the original at the same loudness level. Pure magic…
What headphones give you:
Incredible detail in editing, hearing tiny noises in the background of tracks
Punchy, room-free sound so you can really focus on the shapes of compression curves etc
What they tend to be bad at:
Vocal sibilance can be noticeable on headphones, but WAY more noticeable in a room with even treated amounts of reflections in it. Frequencies which 'poke' through an otherwise balanced mix can be found more easily in a natural sounding room.
Reverbs sound better in headphones because of the contrast of direct sound and imitated room, but in speaker playback you will lose some of this contrast usually resulting in a feeling that you need to turn the reverb down.
Super low end is not flat in any pair of headphones and cannot be accurately reproduced. You will not feel the air movement.
Larger speakers will give a more clear indication of what the low end is doing and where it requires attention.
I mix 95% on headphones and check important mixes with speakers but for the most part I've learned what the problems are and counter them in advance with a quick check after. For example, I've learned what I like for (subtle) reverb levels on vocals across both playback systems and the result is I search for a point at which I can barely hear it but feel it missing when I mute it.
I thought the point of a mixing setup was to reproduce all sounds. EG you don't want have any surprise frequencies that the mixing system doesn't reproduce for whatever reason. Mastering would be the process where you mix for a specific media whether the radio, dj club, iphone...
See this site for exceptionally well done help with ‘phones.
Indeed at 11:10 min he is talking about the crosstalk.
'Can opener', dSoniq Realphones, and other "solutions" are a joke,. I have tried them all.
A proper Binaural Impulse response work the best (at least for me)!
With my setup there is a good bass representation anyway.
The carefully selected Binaural Impulse responses are important.
Azimuth of ±30° is the best indeed. The distance is about ~2m.
I decided to give you my simplistic approach to "Mixing on Headphones in a DAW".
Disclaimer:
· this sort of a guide is intended towards DAW environment with CORE or ASIO audio stream (corresponding drivers of your sound card)
· for listening to music using headphones (OS system overall sound routing) I will make another guide, as it requires much more work and considerations
· I will try to be short and concise as possible, but keep in mind this is not a newbie subject
· for surround sources this guide probably won't be suitable; for mono or stereo source recordings\tracks works great!
Prerequisites:
· assuming you have headphones (it is recommended to have good brand)
This site (link below) is the best one to compare and find your (next\current) headphones!
(extensive options, choose\add\remove brand\model, type of comparison... mind-blowing!)
1· you have a fairly decent sound card (I have NI Komplete 6 and Presonus 24c, really quite basic) with its own ASIO drivers installed (for Windows)
*for Apple Mac probably drivers are different (I can't remember how was it)
2· DAW (Digital Audio Workstation): Reaper, Cubase, Samplitude, Cakewalk, Studio One, Ableton, etc.
3· studio monitors (usually stereo pair) Impulse Responses; scientific for the most sources I use, capturing the monitors, the binaural headset microphones and the studio room environment (I will provide you with mine in the links below)
4· EQ compensation (ReaEQ is enough) with volume level compensation
5. final limiter (not needed but is a good precaution!) and level compensation (volume)
* I use the free 'Limeter№6' by VladG (its modern and paid version is called 'TDR Limiter 6 GE') Limiter №6
6· final manual EQ headphone correction (on the MonitoringFX for most scenarios, as we do not want this to get printed in our final Mixdown)
- ReaEQ is enough; the correction curve is not exactly the same (actually flipped) as the ones used for direct measurement from the freq.\sensitivity response tech. data, because we have already used 'studio monitors impulse responses' + 'binaural headset microphones' + 'studio room acoustics' with their own spectrum colouration)
- usually final EQ shaping using 'pink noise generator' plugin as sound source and notching down certain resonance frequencies (EQ cuts) is enough (I will show mine)
7· proper routing in the DAW (Reaper) and FXChain preset (I will provide you with mine) and it is perfect for stereo and mono sources
****************************
1· Download and use a pair (both) ['studio monitors impulse responses' + 'binaural headset microphones' + 'studio room acoustics'] stereo files for your sample-rate:
44100Hz, 48kHz, 88kHZ, 96kHZ are provided.
2. Now go an open Reaper!
Create a track. Probably by default it will be a stereo track (having 2 Track channels, it covers mono as well).
3. Load up the 'Stereo separated sample.wav' in that track and... follow the instructions in the provided downloadable files below!
example with my setup (the audio is not great because of additional compression): audio-video example
This is really cool! Just installed this in my monitoringfx, I really went to turn down my speaker volume as I thought they were on when demoing with your stereo separated voice sample.
Four questions:
1. When I turn of the corrective EQ at the end of the signal chain the left side signal is turned quiet, is it supposed to be like this?
2. If I understood correctly, the EQ instance within the fxchain is to correct for eq curve on the speaker impulses, am I supposed to add another EQ instance to correct for my headphone eq curve? (I'm using HD600's, and I saw from the link to the headphones you provided how their frequency curve looked like and I would like to make them flatter). If so, where should I add this instance? Before speaker impulses, in the middle of speaker impulses and the corrective reaeq or as last instance? The photo 4 claim the eq curve corrects for the "flatness" of the captured signals, isn't flatness a good thing?
3. If I want to compensate for my headphone freq response, could I just aswell do it in the already added instance of reaeq on the fxchain provided? (related to previous question)
4. Do you only use the limiter to protect your ears, or is this chain adding anything that possibly harms headphones easier than if the chain is not applied, hence the limiter?
Thanks for uploading this! Will see how this works for me while mixing.
I'm too broke to mix on anything other than headphones. At first it was cheap 20 sonys. Then my son had an extra set of gaming headphones he didn't use any more. They're called "Hyper" or something like that. They sounded like they were more articulate than my cheap sonys so I started using them.
I was thinkig about getting a proper set but the fact is I'm used to them and kind of know how if it sounds like on them how it might sound like in other places. Although maybe I need to rethink that cuz I'm not sure my mixes are all that great. LOL.
Four questions:
1. When I turn of the corrective EQ at the end of the signal chain the left side signal is turned quiet, is it supposed to be like this?
Thanks for uploading this! Will see how this works for me while mixing.
It is not supposed to act like this. Have you set up the correct routing for the 4 channels on each plugin?
Make sure not to duplicate the 3 and 4 channels in that plugin.
I will update the archive with more clarification (done).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osse
2. If I understood correctly, the EQ instance within the fxchain is to correct for eq curve on the speaker impulses, am I supposed to add another EQ instance to correct for my headphone eq curve? (I'm using HD600's, and I saw from the link to the headphones you provided how their frequency curve looked like and I would like to make them flatter).
If so, where should I add this instance? Before speaker impulses, in the middle of speaker impulses and the corrective reaeq or as last instance? The photo 4 claim the eq curve corrects for the "flatness" of the captured signals, isn't flatness a good thing?
Yes, the EQ curved from '04. ReaEQ channel sum up.jpg' is to correct the slight tilt towards the lows as no subwoofer was used (not captured from 2.1 setup, which would require another pair of channels, making them 6). That EQ curve is recommended, but might be gently flattened a bit.
And yes, you are supposed to add the second EQ '06. ReaEQ in MonitoringFX.jpg' but it won't (and it should not!) match the curve from the website!
The response on the website has not been done through Binaural setup!
This correction (those small EQ cuts) will have to be different for your headphones.
You can determine such cuts by loading a noise generating plugin (pink noise) at the very fist slot of the chain (temporarily) and run the pink noise through the binaural setup.
Then simply remove what feels like too much resonance (a side-effect of your own headphones EQ response to this setup). I do understand it is easier said than done exactly, because for each headphones it will be different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osse
3. If I want to compensate for my headphone freq response, could I just as well do it in the already added instance of reaeq on the fxchain provided? (related to previous question)
Not, really. Because this EQ is acts just as a tilt for the Binaural setup. Certainly not as a headphone correction!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osse
4. Do you only use the limiter to protect your ears, or is this chain adding anything that possibly harms headphones easier than if the chain is not applied, hence the limiter?
Limiter is only needed if you plan to re-master for headphones your existing mixes or songs from CD albums. Also for a level control, as some people like to listen loud on Binaural setup, as it is more comfortable for the ears (if done correctly) than 'standard stereo'.
If you plan to re-master some 'standard stereo' tracks, keep in mind to:
· either load up the Binaural setup on the Master track (easy to render many tracks at once)
· load up some Limiter for final control on the Master
· to keep the EQ plugin shown in '06. ReaEQ in MonitoringFX.jpg' only in the MonitoringFX (so it does not affect the rendered re-mix when you listen it back on the same headphones or any other pair of headphones)!
It is not supposed to act like this. Have you set up the correct routing for the 4 channels on each plugin?
Make sure not to duplicate the 3 and 4 channels in that plugin.
I will update the archive with more clarification (done).
Yes, the EQ curved from '04. ReaEQ channel sum up.jpg' is to correct the slight tilt towards the lows as no subwoofer was used (not captured from 2.1 setup, which would require another pair of channels, making them 6). That EQ curve is recommended, but might be gently flattened a bit.
And yes, you are supposed to add the second EQ '06. ReaEQ in MonitoringFX.jpg' but it won't (and it should not!) match the curve from the website!
The response on the website has not been done through Binaural setup!
This correction (those small EQ cuts) will have to be different for your headphones.
You can determine such cuts by loading a noise generating plugin (pink noise) at the very fist slot of the chain (temporarily) and run the pink noise through the binaural setup.
Then simply remove what feels like too much resonance (a side-effect of your own headphones EQ response to this setup). I do understand it is easier said than done exactly, because for each headphones it will be different.
Not, really. Because this EQ is acts just as a tilt for the Binaural setup. Certainly not as a headphone correction!
Limiter is only needed if you plan to re-master for headphones your existing mixes or songs from CD albums. Also for a level control, as some people like to listen loud on Binaural setup, as it is more comfortable for the ears (if done correctly) than 'standard stereo'.
If you plan to re-master some 'standard stereo' tracks, keep in mind to:
· either load up the Binaural setup on the Master track (easy to render many tracks at once)
· load up some Limiter for final control on the Master
· to keep the EQ plugin shown in '06. ReaEQ in MonitoringFX.jpg' only in the MonitoringFX (so it does not affect the rendered re-mix when you listen it back on the same headphones or any other pair of headphones)!
Ok cool, where in the chain do you place the corrective eq from picture 06. ReaEQ in MonitoringFX? I cannot see where it is placed in the chain.
This is the way it sounds with everything active in my headphones (rendered with chain onto the track), even tho it dissapears in left channel when I turn off the EQ instance, sounds correct doesn't it? https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZnH...ew?usp=sharing
Also including pics of how my routing looks. Might have something to do with me having another soundcard, with different destinations? Yours have no names while mine has. In general the routing matrix is really confusing to me. Wish someone like Kenny had a tutorial to explain it, but I havn't found any.
Where in the chain do you place the corrective eq from picture 06. ReaEQ in MonitoringFX? I cannot see where it is placed in the chain.
In general the routing matrix is really confusing to me.
It is shown in the filename... where this EQ should be placed (I will emphasize it in colour):
'06. ReaEQ in MonitoringFX.jpg'
Your routing seems correct on the screenshots.
Yes, the Routing matrix in Reaper is quite entangling, but once you get its quirks, it is not that bad.
With Binaural the problem is that one side of the output, must rout two rights or two lefts of the double channel Impulse files (each monitor).
So the first (Left) output (left cup of a headphone) must rout each first (left) channel of the Impulse Response (stereo = double channel) file.
The big confusion comes with the fact that those must be loaded in sequence (can not be loaded in parallel, at least I do not know how if it is possible in Reaper) with two ReaVerbs, one after the other... and those ReaVerbs must not conflict, nor duplicate the respective routing.
The audio seems ok to me. It sound Binaural (in a standard stereo output) and that is how it should be.
Hi all,
Another quick question, is it bad to mix on headphones?
Are there any headphones that would be ok to use for mixing?
Thanks!
I'd just do it, try it. Wouldn't worry about correction.
Play your best music in the music shop, pick a pair of headphones that make sense to you sound wise (experience goes a long way here, sorry no way to work around that) and just mix a lot.
The video Sari posted explains this rather well.
I have pretty much the same experience.
I do all my mixes in headphones and check mainly reverb levels on speaker.
Linear Mode
