suggestions for separating sounds in busy mix

Hi all! I'm hoping to hear some great words of wisdom on this. I have a remix nearly done, and I'm trying to really separate the sounds during the busiest part of the mix. I've looped the section and opened all eqs, making cuts and boosts such that each instrument can play in it's own strongest frequency range. I try to cut no more than 4db at any point, and boost no more than 2db, fairly wide q. I've also got things panned to different places, gently (not overpanned). I've done this so carefully but it still sounds a bit cluttered.

The two sounds I'm having the worst time with are my lead which is an oboe that plays around 800Hz, and the piano which seems to live primarily at 600Hz. The other elements are either much higher (bells, plucky things) or lower (bass), and for pads I have scooped out much of the midrange to accomodate the leads. Still fighting for presence.

Any advice is appreciated, what are your strategies for this?

Edit: I wrote this big long post thinking you meant stereo separation and it just now dawned on me you mean separating out the frequencies.

Still, try some of this out and see if it help improve it all the same.

* Drums, front and center with splash cymbals in the left or doubled on both sides. Hi-hats also mid-left and things like tambourines or other GM percussion balanced in the right. Toms are usually automatic.

* bass, front and center

* mid-range chord accompaniment I alternate between lefts and rights and sometimes double with another instrument of a different timbre to add more color. Pads are stereo separated. Strum chords (if I have any) in the left and piano-style chords in the right and turned down so they don't all overwhelm each other.

* lead front and center, sometimes doubled with other instruments in the mid-left to mid-right, depending on which side needs more balancing.

* high strings in the left and high vox in the right.

* SFX and other unconventional sounds I just look to see where it sounds better and often automate so they don't stagnate in the soundscape.

If you're using an orchestra, look up the proper orchestra placing and follow accordingly.

Stereo balance is the name of the game, make sure the levels aren't overwhelming one or another.

And it just now hit me you're talking about separating the instruments based on frequency, not stereo. D'oh.

Yes, I was referring to separating the frequencies... but thanks anyway, great info!

Well, it's kinda hard to offer suggestions for separating sounds in a frequency without knowing what your track sounds like. You can't imagine hearing the frequencies scooped out as well as you can imagine hearing them in a stereo mix.

There are different characteristics of a sound that live in different frequencies. What you want to be able to do is judge which aspects of which sounds you want to highlight, and then boost or cut the EQ to make it fit. I never have two instruments playing the same thing in the same registers, so in the case of an oboe and piano, I'd listen to the composition and hear what each of them is doing, and then make sure that there isn't much melodic overlap between them (unless you're going for a unison).

Something else that you have to learn to do is to lose focus within the mix, cuz if you're locked into the oboe then you'll hear everything that's fighting with it, but if you can step back and lose that focus on the oboe (or any one instrument) you might hear that they really aren't fighting that much.

Once you do all you can do with EQ, you should move on to volume and panning. Automate the oboe to move away from the piano in the panning field when they share the melody (if your piano is stereo then even better), and also automate a volume envelope to raise the volume of the oboe either during or before the part where they clash. I said before because you can trick the listeners ear into focusing on the oboe by boosting it before the unison (if for some reason raising the oboe during the unison kills the song). That way the listener already has the oboe in memory and will automatically follow it even when it's being buried under other stuff in the coming section.

Just always remember that it's very different to focus into sounds as a listener than it is as a mixer.

That's some really great advice. Actually it is the piano that gets a bit buried under everything else... the oboe is fairly clear... I'll have to play around to try to bring it out somehow, just enough. Yeah, it will be easier to judge within the mix... it's not up to par for me to post it yet in the wip forum, but soon. Thanks, guys.

Boost the important part of one tracks, cut that part in overlapping tracks. Figuring out the important frequencies and how much to boost/cut is the hard, case-by-case part.

What is stereo separating?

One thing I struggled with for a long time was trying to make every instrument crystal-clear during every section. In the process of doing so, I would cut so much that the instruments would sound anemic. Really, it was more a problem with my songwriting than my production (though both have improved since). I wasn't trying to make a focus for the listener, I wasn't in tune with what sounds complemented each other, and I was cramming a bunch of different parts together so that sometimes there would be multiple lead instruments playing at the same time. Now I figure out what I want the listener to pay attention to and sculpt the rest of the song around it. Sometimes that means cutting away part of an instrument so that it sounds more in the background. More often it means replacing an instrument with something that doesn't conflict as much. It's a process that can take a while to learn and I'd suggest trying both. Getting a second (third, etc.) opinion can also be very valuable because after a while you lose your objectivity about whether something sounds ok or not.

What is stereo separating?

Stereo width, panning, phase, how the sound is represented in each speaker... basically the direction is seems to come from.

The way I see it, there's three types of audio separation: by frequency (timbre, eq, also writing), in stereo (left-right, width), and distance (reverb/volume/eq).

One thing I struggled with for a long time was trying to make every instrument crystal-clear during every section. In the process of doing so, I would cut so much that the instruments would sound anemic. Really, it was more a problem with my songwriting than my production (though both have improved since). I wasn't trying to make a focus for the listener, I wasn't in tune with what sounds complemented each other, and I was cramming a bunch of different parts together so that sometimes there would be multiple lead instruments playing at the same time. Now I figure out what I want the listener to pay attention to and sculpt the rest of the song around it. Sometimes that means cutting away part of an instrument so that it sounds more in the background. More often it means replacing an instrument with something that doesn't conflict as much. It's a process that can take a while to learn and I'd suggest trying both. Getting a second (third, etc.) opinion can also be very valuable because after a while you lose your objectivity about whether something sounds ok or not.

Awesome, awesome, awesome advice. Thanks for that. I have in fact sent this particular song to three friends whom I trust immensely... one said there was some masking at the climactic portion (although he said he was admittedly tired when he listened), another said (without being asked about this) that he was impressed at how I had gotten each sound to be distinct. So two completely different opinions. I have totally lost objectivity! I am waiting for the third "expert" opinion, and then I will post this in the wip forum for even more "expert" opinions, haha!

Thanks again, this was especially good advice.

Yeah, you definitely don't want your listener LISTENING to too much at the same time. That's how "busy-ness" occurs and its not great execution.

In your song, focus, as you move through the parts, which sounds and elements you want your listener to focus on. He's heard the saw lead for 8 bars, now switch it up with a square. Repeat until the last measure where they duet a harmony. Drop out, let them focus on the crystal arps for a minute until a small string comes in, slowly introduce the saw back in, etc.

Vinnie's suggestion was incredible, put that in as a cornerstone to your learning.

Yeah, you definitely don't want your listener LISTENING to too much at the same time. That's how "busy-ness" occurs and its not great execution.

In your song, focus, as you move through the parts, which sounds and elements you want your listener to focus on. He's heard the saw lead for 8 bars, now switch it up with a square. Repeat until the last measure where they duet a harmony. Drop out, let them focus on the crystal arps for a minute until a small string comes in, slowly introduce the saw back in, etc.

Vinnie's suggestion was incredible, put that in as a cornerstone to your learning.

Yes I agree. I got more out of this response (Vinnie's and yours) than even the answer to my original question. Thanks guys, I feel enlightened and empowered.