Just because a successful producer makes something a certain way doesn’t mean that’s the way everyone should do it. It worked for them, on that track, with those sounds. That’s worth paying attention to, but it doesn’t make it a rule.
I think this gets lost in a lot of production advice. Someone shows how they process a bass and the discussion becomes about which plugins they used, or what the settings were. You can copy all of that and still be nowhere near the sound, because your starting point is different. You might also end up changing something that was already working in your own track.
Of course you should learn from producers you admire. I just don’t think their success means you have to agree with every decision they make.
More than one way to get there
If your kick isn’t coming through, sidechain compression might help. So might shortening a bass note. You could spend an hour trying different EQ settings when choosing a different kick would get you closer to what you wanted.
None of those approaches is automatically the best one. It depends on the track and what you’re trying to hear. Even two producers working with the same sounds might want a completely different balance between them.
This is part of the appeal of dance music for me. There’s so much scope to take the same equipment and come out with something different. It would be a shame to have all that flexibility and then feel obliged to follow somebody else’s exact process.
A lot of the artists who stand out are the ones with something recognisable about their sound. Sometimes that comes from a decision another producer would have told them to change. It might be rougher than you’d normally go for, or have a balance you wouldn’t choose yourself, but it works as part of their music.
Technically right, but does it sound right?
Sound science is useful. If you understand why two sounds are masking each other, you’ve got a better chance of deciding what to do about it. Knowing what a compressor is actually changing saves a lot of guessing too.
But there’s a limit to what that knowledge can decide for you. An analyser can show you how much low end there is. It can’t tell you whether that amount feels right for the record you’re making.
The same goes for distortion. You might deliberately want a sound to be pushed and uncomfortable. Cleaning it up could make it less interesting. Whether that’s a good decision depends on hearing it in the track, not simply finding a setting that measures better.
I’m not suggesting you ignore technical problems. If your bass disappears when you check in mono, you probably want to understand why. Once you know what’s happening, you can make a judgement about how much it matters and what you’re prepared to change.
Try it before you rule it out
Experimentation is how you find out where your own preferences are. If you’ve been told a certain approach won’t work, try it anyway. You may hear exactly why the advice exists. You may also find a use for it that the advice didn’t account for.
You do need to be honest with yourself when you compare the results. Turn the louder version down so you’re not just choosing extra volume. Listen with the rest of the track playing. Something can sound brilliant on its own and make a mess of the arrangement.
And if the experiment sounds worse, undo it. You haven’t wasted your time. You’ve heard the difference for yourself, which is much more useful than remembering that someone on a forum said never to do it.
Where Mix Lock fits
That applies to Mix Lock too. I’ve put a structure together to help you understand your mix, but I don’t want anyone opening the template and thinking they’re only allowed to use what’s already there.
If you want to add a plugin, add it. You might have a sound-design chain doing a lot of processing before the sound even reaches a Mix Lock rack. That’s absolutely fine. If that processing is how you get the character you want, there’s no reason to strip it out just to fit the template.
You can then use the rack to work on how that sound sits with everything else. Listen to what it’s adding to the processing you’ve already done. You might need very little from it. You certainly don’t have to use every control just because it’s there.
I see Mix Lock as a set of guardrails while you get your bearings. The suggested ranges give you somewhere to start and help you understand what happens when you move a control. They aren’t limits on what you’re allowed to make. If going beyond a range gets you closer to the sound you’re after, I’d encourage you to try it and hear what happens in the full mix.
I’d encourage you to change things and add your own processing. If you end up using the template in a way I hadn’t thought of, I’d like to hear about it. The whole point is to help you make decisions about your music, including decisions I might not make myself.
For me, the point of learning more about production is being able to try more things with some understanding of what might happen. I’d rather hear someone develop a sound of their own, even if I’d have done parts of it differently. There’s enough room in dance music for that.