EQing in Octaves: Part 1
This is the first of a three-part email series designed to simplify your approach to EQ and help you make better mixing decisions.
We measure sound frequencies on a logarithmic scale in Hertz (Hz), or cycles per second. While essential for describing audio, this unit can feel abstract and disconnected to how we think about and create music. For example, a frequency of 100 Hz means a sound wave vibrates or oscillates for one full cycle at 100 times per second.
This is the first of a three-part email series designed to simplify your approach to EQ and help you make better mixing decisions.
We measure sound frequencies on a logarithmic scale in Hertz (Hz), or cycles per second. While essential for describing audio, this unit can feel abstract and disconnected to how we think about and create music. For example, a frequency of 100 Hz means a sound wave vibrates or oscillates for one full cycle at 100 times per second.
Musical notes are sound waves oscillating at specific cycles per second, and an octave is simply doubling or halving those oscillations to move up or down the scale.
Here’s where it gets tricky: there are only 12 notes in an octave, regardless of whether you're looking at 30–60 Hz or 3,000–6,000 Hz. This is because octaves follow a logarithmic scale—frequencies double with each octave (e.g., 20 Hz, 40 Hz, 80 Hz, 160 Hz, and so on)
This doubling can seem daunting, especially on an EQ graph, but understanding it can simplify how you approach EQing and balancing a mix.
Simplifying EQ: From Hertz to Octaves
The human ear picks up frequencies from 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz—a pretty wide range. But sound doesn’t stop at the limits of our hearing range. There are sound waves below what we can hear (infrasonic) and above it (ultrasonic). However, these low frequencies are usually filtered out by DC filters, and high frequencies by anti-aliasing filters, depending on the sample rate, of course.
Focusing on what we can hear, if we think in terms of musical octaves instead of raw numbers, that big range of 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz boils down to just under 10 octaves. That’s 10 manageable “bands” to work with, instead of 20,000 individual frequencies. Much easier to wrap your head around, right? Those 10 octaves can be broken down like this...
The 'middle' frequency of our hearing range, numerically speaking, is around 640 Hz—an unexpected midpoint, but it makes sense when we think in terms of octaves. There are about 5 octaves below 640 Hz (down to 20 Hz) and 5 above (up to 20 kHz), meaning our hearing is split evenly in terms of octaves.
Relating EQ to musical octaves makes frequency adjustments feel more intuitive and grounded in how we naturally think about music. When EQing, I typically cut with narrower bands, often about an octave wide, to address specific issues. On the other hand, when boosting, I prefer using wider bells, spanning two or more octaves, to shape the tone more musically.
However, not all octaves are perceived equally. Our ears are most sensitive to the 1–5 kHz range (roughly octaves 6–8 on the frequency spectrum), where our hearing is naturally tuned to detect detail—an evolutionary trait that likely developed for survival. This range encompasses the majority of human speech, and our sensitivity to subtle nuances within it has been essential for communication and fostering social bonds throughout history.
That may be a bit too much evolutionary context for this conversation about EQing your mix, but this 2.5-octave range demands our attention. Our ears are particularly attuned to this area and are highly sensitive to imbalance, excessive transients, and shifts in loudness. Getting it right can dramatically affect how the listener perceives loudness, balance, and presence in your mix.
Thinking in octaves can transform your approach to EQ, shifting it from a technical grind to a more natural, gestural, and musical process. By mastering the fundamentals of EQ, compression, and saturation, you’ll discover that many “problem-solving” tools—like resonance suppressors (e.g., Soothe 2)—are often used to address balance issues that could be resolved with better EQ techniques. While these tools have their place in specific scenarios, they are frequently overused in modern music production.
By understanding how octaves relate to the music we create, you can map your EQ decisions more effectively to the issues you hear in a mix. This empowers you to make more informed choices and reduces reliance on complex modern resonance tools, which can inadvertently introduce unwanted artifacts that often go unnoticed.
In Part 2, we’ll dive deeper into the individual frequency bands. We’ll talk about common issues, how to tackle them, and how to keep your mixes musical and balanced.
Have questions? Just hit reply, and we’ll get back to you. You can also tag us on instagram—we’re always happy to connect!
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital
Reviving Loud & Limited Pre-Masters with GOLD CLIP
As a mastering engineer, I’m often handed mixes that are already limited or clipped. These loud, finalized mixes can be tricky to work with because there’s often very little headroom or transient detail left. What I do as a mastering engineer involves envelope or dynamic shaping just as much as balancing, sweetening, and preparing a mix for distribution.
As a mastering engineer, I’m often handed mixes (pre-masters) that are already limited or clipped. These finalized mixes can be challenging to work with because they are already heavily limited, leaving little transient detail. As a mastering engineer, my work often includes envelope and dynamic shaping just as much as balancing, sweetening, and readying a song for distribution.
The Challenge of Loud Mixes
When I receive loud mixes, my ability to shape the envelope is reduced because the transients have been chopped away beforehand. While I usually request a separate, lower-level pre-master for more flexibility in handling transients, some mixing engineers prefer to stick with their loud mixes—and that’s perfectly fine.
The question is: what purpose does a clipper serve in a mix that’s already limited and clipped?
You might think a clipper has no role here. After all, if the transients are already clipped or limited, what more could a clipper possibly do? The answer lies in what makes Gold Clip so much more than just a clipper.
Gold Clip: Not Just a Clipper
Gold Clip isn’t just a traditional clipper—it’s a versatile tool equipped with internal processors specifically designed to refine limited or clipped signals, making it perfect for handling loud pre-masters. Every element in Gold Clip is bypass-able, allowing you to adapt it to the needs of your mix. For tracks that are already clipped or limited, you can turn off the clipping and saturation components while leaving on Box Tone and Alchemy. These processors can then work independently to smooth and soften clipping artifacts.
In my latest YouTube video, I explain how I use Box Tone and Alchemy to smooth and refine heavily limited or clipped mixes.
What You’ll Learn in the Video
🎛️ How Modern Box Tone smooths the top end, filters out harsh ultrasonic frequencies, and refines loud mixes.
⚙️ How Alchemy dynamically softens harsh peaks by emulating high-frequency compression, but without relying on traditional attack and release times. Instead, it behaves more like the natural smoothing effect of tape magnetization.
💡 Why Gold Clip’s bypass-able design makes it a versatile mastering tool, allowing you to use its processors as standalone tools for smoothing clipped or limited pre-masters.
If you’ve ever struggled with mastering loud, limited mixes, this video will give you some new ideas on how Gold Clip might help.
Check it out below:
Have questions? Just hit reply, and we’ll get back to you. You can also tag us on instagram—we’re always happy to connect!
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital
Struggling with Low End in Your Mix? Try This...
You have heard me say this before, but as engineers, we tend to overcomplicate things. Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest solution is always the most effective.
You have heard me say this before, but as engineers, we tend to overcomplicate things. Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest solution is always the most effective. Regardless, when faced with mixing problems, we tend to try the most complicated solutions first. When I taught a mixing class at Drexel University, I would tell my students that they were turning their songs into science projects by using overly complicated solutions for simple problems.
For example, if their low end was not hitting right, they would use side-chain compression, dynamic EQ, multi-band compression, parallel compression, clipping, limiting or some complex combination of them all to control the low end. But those approaches should be your last step, not your first. When trying to shape the tone, weight, size and speed of the low end, this simple EQ technique is an effective first step.
3 Steps to Balancing Low End
1) Set the weight or size of the low end with a low frequency shelf
2) Rebalance the first three octaves of the low end with a bell or shelf
3) Set the speed and depth of the low end with a high-pass filter
1) Setting the Size of the Low End
For most popular music, the frequency with the loudest amplitude in a mix is usually between 80 Hz and 100 Hz.
The below graph shows the average spectral balance of #1 hits in the US & UK from 1950 to 2010. (AES, 2013)*
By using the low frequency shelf first, we are setting the size of the low end in relation to the rest of the mix. When setting the shelf, ask yourself, "Is the low end moving the speakers too much?" That may seem exciting in the studio, but it's unlikely to translate to consumer systems that are not designed for excessive low end. "Does the mix lack weight and size? Does the low end feel weak?"
It's best to start with a simple low frequency shelf because it does not change the relationship of the low-end instruments or octaves, only the overall size of the low end in relation to the rest of the mix.
I call this "Right Sizing" the low end. We are looking for that 1dB window to right-size the low end in relation to the whole mix.
I'll use a low-frequency shelf between 80 Hz and 150 Hz to set the right size of the low end of the mix. It can be helpful to close your eyes while you move the gain. That way, your eyes do not make the decision for you, your ears do.
2) Rebalancing the First Three Octaves
It's easier to think of music in octaves than in frequencies. We hear a total of 9.5 octaves, but only the first three consist of the lows and some low midrange. To balance the low end, you want to ensure that the energy is distributed properly among the first three octaves.
Octave 1 - 20Hz-40Hz - Deep subs. This area is perceived less as musical notes and more like a deep pillowy energy or rumble.
Octave 2 - 40Hz-80Hz - Fundamental bass. This is where the fundamental of the bass line and kick sits. The low E on an electric bass is 41Hz. If it's a 5-string bass, the low B is 31Hz. Same goes for an 808 sample that is a low E or B note.
Octave 3 - 80Hz-160Hz - This is the top of the lows and the start of the low midrange. This range will help define the musical note on smaller speakers and is commonly where the low-end attack of the kick or bass is perceived.
With the shelf, we set the overall weight of the low end; now, we are setting the distribution of energy between the first three octaves. I may pull up or down at 40 Hz or 120 Hz to redistribute the energy of the bass. (I removed the shelf from the graph below for demonstration purposes)
If I want to redistribute the energy away from the deep and rumbling sub area, I'll pull back at 30 Hz or 40 Hz with a shelf or bell. If I want more attack and transient energy from the low end instrument, I'll push up at 110 Hz to 140 Hz. If things feel too heavy or resonant, most likely 70 Hz to 110 Hz is taking up too much space. Pulling back the center frequency of 90 Hz will make the mix feel less congested and dense.
You can create all types of useful EQ shapes with a shelf and bell (or just two shelves). Here are some examples of how I may change the relationship between the first three octaves of a mix. Decibel values are excluded on purpose.
3) Set the Speed & Depth of the Low End
This last step is not always necessary. You have probably read all over the internet to "high-pass filter" everything, but I advise against that. I generally only high-pass filter if necessary. If there is excessive rumble or if the low end is feeling slow, I'll engage a high-pass filter, but I would most likely use another shelf first. I'll save my reasons for another day.
You may ask, "What do I mean by the low end sounding slow?" When there is excessive subs between 20 Hz and 40 Hz it can make a mix feel sluggish. Those frequencies tend to stick around and resonate for longer, making things feel slow. If the rhythm of the low end is particularly fast, then reducing the deep subs can give the low frequency rhythm more percussive clarity.
Set up a HPF with a 12dB per octave slope, close your eyes and drag the filter higher until you feel the low end getting lighter or faster. If you want the low end fast, you may want to aggressively high pass filter, but if you want pure and deep sub, it may be best to turn the HPF off and rely on another low frequency shelf to set the size of the sub. Here are some examples of the curves I may use to reshape the low end.
By setting the weight of the mix with a broad low frequency shelf, redistributing the energy of the first three octaves with bells, and setting the speed and depth of the low-end with a high pass filter, you can solve most low-frequency issues in a mix.
Occam's Razor - the simplest solution is almost always the best solution.
Give it a try and let me know what you think. Tag me on my @SchwabeDigital instagram and let me know what you think..
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital
Simple Tips for Mastering
I am a minimalist at heart. I want processors that are simple, direct, and powerful. As engineers, we can quickly overcomplicate things.
I am a minimalist at heart. I want processes that are simple, direct, and powerful. As engineers, we tend overcomplicate things by inventing novel solutions to problems our ears may have exaggerated.
We try to create scientific solutions to the problems we hear, but sometimes those problems are not issues at all. Or our solutions create unintended consequences we might not notice in the excitement of our solution. We have to remember we are creating art, we are not doing scientific experiments. It is not our job to polish every problem away. That’s why I have come up with the ethos of “Don’t Do Too Much”. Because a lot of times doing too much is what makes music sound overcooked.
First Step - Start Clean
My first step in mastering is to push the record up to a loudness that is appropriate for the genre with Gold Clip and my favorite final limiter. Some people are anti-loudness, but I am not. I believe some genres benefit from loud masters. They create a sense of cohesion and density that is sometimes necessary for the production.
I'll start with the default Gold Clip preset and adjust the input level so peaks go to 0.0dBFS on the input meter (essentially no clipping), and then add 1dB to 2dB of Modern Gold. I then insert my favorite final limiter after Gold Clip and get the rest of my loudness. 2dB of Modern Gold means the final limiter will do 2dB of less gain reduction to achieve the loudness you desire.
When I want my master extra clean, I may turn the clipper off (command clicking the clipper) and only use the Modern Gold processing. However, turning the clipper off comes with some risks. Read more about those risks here.
It's rare, but for some songs, Gold Clip and a final limiter may be enough. However, this simple and loud version of the mix gives me the sound that I call "digital urgency."
Digital Urgency
Digital urgency is the pure, in-your-face version of the song. It is also most likely how the producer & engineer heard the song when they said, "This record is done. I usually get my master to the exact same loudness that I hear in their reference mix. By the way, I always ask for the pre-master and the reference mix so I can hear what was approved by the team behind the song."
Now that I have that loud, clean, and true-to-the-artist's-intention version of the song, the limiter may start to tell me about what is wrong with the mix. Most specifically, if the low end is pushed too hard, I'll hear the limiter's gain reduction bite down on the bass and kick hits and modulate the mid-range in a weird and ugly way.
If the mix is bitter or harsh sounding, that will come forward too. If the mix sounds boxy, then that boxy tone will be pulled forward even more. I then have to come up with solutions to fix those problems.
I tend to fix these problems with the cleanest solutions first and then move to using color tools. If the low end is buckling down into the limiter, it may need some low-frequency shelving or filtering with a clean EQ. I then ask myself, did that adjustment make the low-end interact with the limiter in a more natural way? Did I go too far and lose the power of the mix?
When To Compress
If things feel too loose or flappy in the mid-range, I may need some compression to give the song cohesion or bounce.
For mastering compression, I tend to filter out anything below 150Hz into the key input of the compressor. That way, the compressor is responding to and creating clarity in the mid-range and not bouncing around with the kick and bass.
Many modern mixes are so hyper compressed that compression is not always needed in mastering. Be judicious and consider how compressed the mix might already be. Also, listen to how the compressor interacts with the limiter. I often use a compressor to increase the attack of the kick as it hits the final limiter. Be intentful with the compressor. If you do not have an intended dynamic outcome in mind then most likely compression is not needed at all. If I do use compression, I always filter out the lows and tend to use slower attack times of 30-50 ms. That lets some transients through and increases punch.
Finding Balance
Clarity and power in the mid-range is the key to perceived loudness on streaming services. Sustained resonances in the mid-range will raise your average LUFS and reduce your perceived volume on streaming. Finding balance in this range is the where I spend a lot of time when mastering.
Does the mix feel tight, balanced and powerful in the midrange?
Does the mix now feel tight and balanced in the midrange?
If the mix is too brittle, pointy or harsh in the tops, maybe high-frequency shelving and some soft-knee de-essing will lessen that high-frequency fatigue.
Sometimes records have what I call "instrument-frequency discontinuity". What is that? It's when one instrument is particularly resonant in a frequency range and is poking out harshly in a mix. Maybe a tambourine is pointy around 12 kHz and mixed too loud. The easiest solution is to ask for a new mix, but sometimes that is not possible. In those situations, a tight EQ reduction to that frequency range is my first move. If the discontinuity is in the mid or high frequencies, I'll use a linear phase EQ. If it is below 2 kHz, I'll most likely use a natural phase EQ. If that EQ move is not enough to fix it, then I might move to a dynamic notch filter with Weiss de-esser or Kirchoff EQ.
Is the top end bright, but gentle enough to not fatigue the ear now?
These are all clean solutions to getting a balanced “true to mix” version of the record. I usually start with these or similar concepts first, and then move to more colorful approaches.
Adding Color (or not)
Once the loudness, balance, and dynamics are in place, I then start to think about how far I can push things, what I can experiment with, and what is appropriate for the genre.
We already made the decision about the loudness for the genre, but we have to ask ourselves what best serves the song.
Is this song best served by digital urgency and clarity, meaning no tubes, tape, or transformers, just that clean in-your-face sound?
Believe it or not, some productions sound much better that way, but others may need some extra flavor.
Some records may need some saturation, clipping, tape emulation, transformers etc. All of these devices start to add color, but move the record away from that digital urgency I mentioned earlier.
Know Your Role
Your job as an engineer is to decide what's appropriate. Is this going to be clean and pure like a Doja Cat or James Blake record, or is it going to be soft, rounded, and sauced up with color like a Tame Impala or Alabama Shakes record? Or maybe it lives somewhere in the middle?
Those decisions are yours, but I generally tend to start clean and make it sound as whole as possible, then add color as I see fit for the genre and the issues that the production presents.
In mastering, I always tell myself "don't do too much." In mixing, I am more often smashing things around more aggressively.
However, I usually solve problems with clean processors first and then move toward the colorful and crunchy processors after that. But keep in mind these approaches are interactive, and I often find myself circling back to my clean processors as the colorful ones make their mark.
Give it a try and let me know how it works for you. We all have our own solutions to the sonic issues we hear in our music, but these are the approaches that worked best for me and I hope they are meaningful for you.
Tag me on my @SchwabeDigital instagram and let me know what you think..
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital
Mastering Secrets & Musical U-Turns: My Chat with Mike Indovina
I recently spoke to Mike Indovina of the Master Your Mix Podcast about how you can use clipping to your advantage.
I recently joined Mike Indovina on the Master Your Mix Podcast to share how you can use clipping to your advantage in your mixes.
We also explored the unexpected twists in my music career, my approach to mixing and mastering, and the reasoning behind when I reach for digital tools over analog gear.
If you're curious about the techniques and philosophy that define my approach to mixing and mastering—or if you just want an honest, unfiltered conversation about music—this episode is for you.
Take a listen below and let me know what you think. Hit reply or tag me on my @SchwabeDigital instagram.
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital
Podcast: A Conversation About the Art of Mastering & Mixing with Bobby Owsinski
A while back, I had the pleasure of being interviewed by the legendary author Bobby Owsinski on his podcast,
Hey all,
A while back, I had the pleasure of being interviewed by the legendary author Bobby Owsinski on his podcast, The Inner Circle. Bobby is the author of The Mix Engineer's Handbook, The Recording Engineer's Handbook, The Mastering Engineer's Handbook, and many more.
I always loved Bobby's books and was honored to be interviewed by him. On the podcast, we spoke about learning the art of mastering, my philosophy on mixing, not being tied to certain mixing techniques, developing plugins, and much more. I thought I would share. Click the image to listen to the interview on YouTube.
Tag me on my @SchwabeDigital instagram and let me know what you think..
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital
Podcast: Making Records & Plugins with Help Me Devvon
Back in March of 2024, I did an interview with Devvon Terrell, L.Dre, and Courtney Taylor of the Help Me Devvon / Audio Nerds podcast…
Hey All,
Back in March of 2024, I did an interview with Devvon Terrell, L.Dre, and Courtney Taylor of the Help Me Devvon / Audio Nerds podcast, and I wanted to share it with you. On the pod, we discussed my career in music, a few techniques I have found effective in my mixing and mastering work, making Gold Clip, Orange Clip, and developing my new plugins. Click the image below to watch it on YouTube.
Tag me on my @SchwabeDigital instagram and let me know what you think..
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital
Mixing & Mastering in Headphones
Mixing and mastering records for a living means that you will be working long hours, and those hours often bleed into your personal life…
Mixing and mastering records for a living means that you will be working long hours, and those hours often bleed into your personal life. Throughout my entire career, I did all of my work "in the studio" and refused to use headphones. The problem was that if I traveled, work would build up day by day. Remasters, mix updates, reprints of alternate mixes would stack up.
All this recall work could easily be done on the go, but it was stacking up while I was away and it was stressing me out. When the M2 MacBooks came out, I realized those computers had the power to do my recall work when traveling. You might think this sounds like a compromise, but the results have been surprisingly good, and and I even got to the point that I could start and finish projects in my mobile set up with the same quality (or better) than my studio set up.
EQUIPMENT
I replaced my desktop studio computer with a laptop and hub and set myself free. I was now mobile, but the bigger issue to solve was my monitoring. I work in a finely tuned room with Kii Audio Three speakers fed digitally from my Trinnov, which is fed digitally from my studio computer. I tuned my room over many years while working on thousands of mixes and masters. It was going to be difficult to replicate that system in headphones, but I knew it was possible. I bought a Grace Designs m900 headphone amp and a pair of Audeze LCD-5 headphones. Yes, these are expensive options, but I do this for a living and do not cut corners on monitoring.
I love the Audezes LCD-5s, but to be honest, they alone did not match the sound of my room. They were a bit forward in the mid range, light and slow in the low end and a hair rolled off on the top. You might think that is a bad review for a pair of $5,000 headphones, but I am competing with a $20,000 playback system. The truth is, the LCD-5s had transient detail and clarity that I never heard from other headphones. I knew it was possible to make them work, but I needed to change the balance of the LCD-5s to get the same reliable results I get from my mains. So, I built a playback EQ for my headphones that matched the balance of my room.
BUILDING THE PLAYBACK EQ
I wanted to be able to get the same masters from my headphones as I did in my studio — no compromises. I consulted the legendary engineer and author Bob Katz and he sent me his LCD-5 EQ playback curve, but I still felt it needed refinement to match the sound I was hearing in my room. We all have different preferences and what worked for Bob and his work does not necessarily work for me.
I spent the next 6 months EQ'ing my LCD-5s to match my studio mains. I would master a record on my LCD-5s, and then check it on my mains. The adjustments I made to the masters on my mains would then be integrated into my playback EQ for my headphones.
Eventually, the masters I did on my headphones no longer needed refinement when I checked them on my mains, and at that point, I was comfortable working on my LCD-5s.
For those that are unclear, “playback EQ” is equalization that we monitor, but not that we print into the mix / masters we deliver.
PLAYBACK EQ SETTINGS
Below is the EQ that I landed on for my LCD-5s. I think the EQ curve will work for any of the Audeze headphones, but will likely need some slight adjustments. The LCD-5s use a planar driver which is faster and can be more detailed and mid-forward than the other models. So, adjustments to the mid-range may be necessary for the other models.
This EQ may work for other brands of headphones as well, but I am sure it will need some adjusting it to match your brand and personal preferences.
HPF - 15Hz, 12dB per octave - Makes the low end move a little faster.
45Hz, +0.6dB .5Q - Makes the low end fuller and reduces the boosting you may be inclined to do in that range.
111Hz, -0.6dB .5Q - Reduces the punch.
3,900Hz, -0.8dB .3Q - This mid range cut pulls back the bitterness and ensures your masters have presence.
3,900Hz, -0.5dB 2.0Q - Again, this tighter mid range cut pulls back the bitterness and ensures your masters have presence.
18,000Hz, +0.85dB .3Q - This top end boost accommodates the slight roll off and ensures you do not make overly bright/airy masters.
The presets for Plugin Alliance Kirchoff EQ and FabFilter Pro-Q3 can be downloaded below.
Let me know what you think of the curves. Did you adjust them to your liking, and if so, how?
That’s it for now.
Tag me on my @SchwabeDigital instagram and let me know what you think..
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital
Using Orange Clip & Gold Clip Together
A few weeks back, my friend Ken Lewis asked me to make a video about how I use Gold Clip and Orange Clip for his Mixing Night Podcast. I decided to throw that video on my YouTube page and share it with you.
A few weeks back, my friend Ken Lewis asked me to make a video about how I use Gold Clip and Orange Clip for his Mixing Night Podcast. I decided to throw that video on my YouTube page and share it with you.
In the video, I first show how I use GoldClip in a clean and transparent way on a master for a blues song. Then, I use both Orange and Gold Clip together to make an electronic record sound aggressive and over the top.
Take a listen below and let me know what you think. Hit reply or tag me on my @SchwabeDigital instagram.
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital
Designer of Gold Clip & Orange Clip
p.s. If you haven't already, you can buy or rent-to-own ORANGE CLIP right here.
Reflecting on my Grammy Nomination for Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical
It is coming up on a year since my Grammy nomination for Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical for mixing and mastering Baynk’s Adolescence. When it happened, I was attending the Audio Developers Conference in London on November 12th, 2022.
It is coming up on a year since my Grammy nomination for Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical for mixing and mastering Baynk’s Adolescence. When it happened, I was attending the Audio Developers Conference in London on November 12th, 2022. I was meeting new people in the audio technology and plugin industries and getting excited about finishing Gold Clip. At the keynote address, a New York Times article with my name on it popped up on my phone. I started getting congratulations texts from people I had not heard from in years. I was confused. I had checked the Grammy nominations list an hour prior, and for whatever reason, I did not see my name. I said, "Oh well, maybe next year" and moved on. I kept getting congratulations texts and was generally confused. I thought people were joking with me, but then I looked at that article again and saw my name at the very end — in the Best Engineered category!
I jumped out of my chair, ran out of the keynote address, and screamed my ass off in the lobby. People wondered if I was okay. I was shook, and better than okay. A nomination in this category was something that I had always aspired to but never thought was achievable. Because of the genres of music I worked in and because I made music in a bedroom, not a fancy recording studio, I didn't think it was possible. Best Engineered Album is one of the hardest categories to get nominated in because the submissions span every musical genre except classical. It was the pinnacle of success as a mixing & mastering engineer, and I was humbled.
Ironically, the artist Baynk was living in London at the time and we went out and did a proper celebration together. It was only the second time we met in person. The first was when he was on tour through the US and came through Philadelphia. We made countless songs and records together from other sides of the earth. Baynk in London or New Zealand and I in West Philadelphia.
That experience was one of the most humbling and exciting moments of my life. Awards and accolades are not the reason we get into music, but when they happen, they can reinvigorate your purpose and excitement for your work.
A year later, Gold Clip is out to the world, I continue to mix and master records every day, and I am developing new software tools for next year. I am headed back to the Audio Developers Conference, but this year as a sponsor. Who knows what Grammy nominations await and for who, but my day last year was more than I ever expected.
Thank you for all of the support as a plugin maker and music engineer. I truly appreciate everyone who believes in my ideas and engineering work.
Here is an audio story done by NPR shortly after my nomination.
Tag me on my @SchwabeDigital instagram and let me know what you think..
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital
The Honor of Working in Music
You never know whether a record you are working on is going to be a hit or not. I have tried to predict it and sometimes I was right, but most of the time I had no idea what was going to catch the attention of the world. Honestly, when you start working on a record that turns out to be a hit, it doesn’t feel very different than what you have done before.
You never know whether a record you are working on is going to be a hit or not. I have tried to predict it and sometimes I was right, but most of the time I had no idea what was going to catch the attention of the world. Honestly, when you start working on a record that turns out to be a hit, it doesn’t feel very different than what you have done before.
Sure, you know that there is something special about that song. It hits you in a more brutally honest way than others, but that does not predict where things will go, who will hear it, and how far around the world your work will resonate. That's why it is so important to treat every project you work on like it's a hit.
It's weird, right? Some songs shoot to the top of the charts on the day they are released, others go viral two or even three years later, and some you will spend endless hours on, but they never get released.
You really don't know the power of the art you are creating every day. That's why making music is such a honor and privilege. We get to craft songs and sounds that make people fall in love, that get them hype, or just get them past a trash day.
As producers and engineers, we get to create the sonic palette that surrounds those emotions and it is an honor and privilege. Treat it as such.
Be well,
Ryan Schwabe
Grammy-nominated and multi-platinum mixing & mastering engineer
Founder of Schwabe Digital