Talk:Audio mixing

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Audio mixing article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Professional sound production Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Professional sound production, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sound recording and reproduction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Professional sound productionWikipedia:WikiProject Professional sound productionTemplate:WikiProject Professional sound productionProfessional sound production articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rewrite

This article needs to be expanded, edited, and quite possibly just plain rewritten. There are some very valid points in the article that can stay but it is generally a wee misleading towards the whole world of mixing. For example, something small is discussing the use of a control surface and that it's automation is controlled by a computer. That leads you to believe that an analogue console's automation is controlled by...........midgets? It needs to be a touch clearer on things like that and some parts probably need to be eliminated. I'll probably start organizing this article a bit better soon. Help is always welcome and called for! --PM - PhilyG ^talk 05:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a complete rewrite of this page. Comment would be highly welcomed. Izhaki (talk) 17:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The thing that this article needs the most is inline referencing. Wikipedia:Inline citation. What we have now is a lot of expert knowledge passed on by contributors but there are no citations. Even a standard school textbook or two would be better than nothing. Binksternet (talk) 17:19, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can site my own book for much of the content, but it would be an advertisement. Izhaki (talk) 17:38, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it sucks, but you would be in violation of conflict of interest. Maybe the Yamaha sound reinforcement "bible" would be a good starting place, at least for live mixing. Binksternet (talk) 17:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added both of these to the Further reading section ~Kvng (talk) 16:48, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation Split

From an already existing discussion in this talk page: I'm trying to expand the (currently very poor) Audio mixing article, but I have a big problem with its scope. Originally, Audio mixing included music mixing, live mixing, post-production (motion-picture) mixing and DJ mixing. Trying to write an article that is concise to all four is next to impossible. The history, process, equipment used, while similar, is very different; and it is very hard to write text that is correct to all four categories. The large format consoles used in music mixing is different to those used in post-production theaters, and in live sound there are often specialized matrix desks. If this article is to be written properly it will have to have a top-level division to the three industries (music, live, motion-picture), which suggest that initially there should be more than one article. Izhaki (talk) 23:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the split could be useful. I changed "movies" to "film". Binksternet (talk) 19:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the fundamental problem here is that we actually have at least four articles -- audio mixing, mixing console, DJ mixer, and audio control surface -- that all need to be rewritten in concert. Audio mixing, by itself, should likely be just an article on the theory of audio mixing -- general principles, circuit designs, passive vs. active, that sort of thing. From there, sound editor, while not directly a part of this group, is closely related and probably needs some work as well; furthermore, digital audio workstation, multitrack recording, DJ mixer, audio control surface, and a few others are also relevant. This stuff should all be integrated cleanly before even considering spinning off multiple articles on audio mixing and editing for various venues. Haikupoet (talk) 21:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haikupoet, I'm not sure I understand what you are suggesting here. The fact that we have articles on mixing consoles or audio control surfaces is a good thing - content is centered into the appropriate article, rather than being spread to less relevant articles. As for you suggestion to have the article Audio mixing covering general principles, circuit design, passive vs. passive - do you really think that the majority of people browsing for the audio mixing want to learn about the design of the electronic circuit? I think it doesn't take much to guess that they are into the practice\art of the area. The sub-topics you have suggested (circuit designs, passive vs. active) fall into (analog) mixing consoles. And the section you've added to the article 'Theory' is completely off-topic and exemplify bad structuring. To sum up - I strongly disagree with your view, so perhaps you should elaborate or just try harder to convince us. Izhaki (talk) 12:08, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am to split this page within 14 days unless some strong opposition is presented. Thank, Izhaki (talk) 16:09, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it possible to write one general article about audio mixing ? This "disambiguation page"'s topics all basically deal with the same thing. This page should be an introduction, not disambiguation page. (E-Kartoffel (talk) 20:54, 25 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I agree with Izhaki that most people who are looking at the audio mixing page are not wanting to learn about electronic circuits and the like, they are looking for information on general principles of mixing sounds together into a mono, stereo or surround sound signal. It should discuss the balancing of levels and use of signal processing using mixing consoles and/or DAWs. I think it's probably also a good idea to link to seperate articles for music mixing, live mixing, and post-production.Orson26 (talk) 10:40, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed this discussion for the first time. I agree that this should be a summary article, not disambiguation. I am not convinced that it is impossible to write one article to cover the different contexts in which audio mixing is done. But we can reevaluate that once/if the summary has been developed. --Kvng (talk) 13:50, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this article should be a summary, pointing the reader to their desired subset of the larger general topic. Binksternet (talk) 18:31, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I have also merged Audio mixing (film and television) into this article because it was a long lived stub. Hopefully relocating the material here will attract more love. -—Kvng 17:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hatnotes

Joefromrandb asserts that a hatnote pointing to Audio mixing (recorded music) is needed as standard practice. This is a WP:SUMMARY article and if we're going to have a Audio mixing (recorded music) hatnote, we probably also need a Live sound mixing hatnote too. I don't think any of these are needed and I don't know what policy the editor is referring to. ~Kvng (talk) 15:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]