Interviews

Tchad Blake: Mixing it Up

BY Larry Crane PHOTOGRAPHS BY Wendy (B+W)
Tchad

In Tape Op #16, my pal Stephen Murray interviewed Tchad Blake while he was in the middle of co-producing Pearl Jam's Binaural album in Seattle. Nearly two decades later, Tchad and I sat down in New York to discuss the intervening years, his inspiring mixing style, and relocating to Wales, where's he's been living for over a decade. He's worked on records by Los Lobos, Sheryl Crow, The Black Keys, Peter Gabriel, Madeleine Peyroux, and many others.

It's great to see you again.

Yes, We've changed. Way older!

Well, none of us get younger. I've always been really curious how you ended up on working on Peter Gabriel's Up in 2002. Was that when you started working at Peter's Real World Studios?

There were a couple of projects that I did at Real World before that. I did my second or third production project there for a band called Wild Colonials. We had gone over there because Tony Berg [Tape Op #121] loved the studio plus I'd worked with T Bone Burnett [#67] doing his solo album, The Talking Animals. It was produced by David Rhodes, Peter Gabriel's guitar player. David and I got on really well and we became friends. Mitchell [Froom, #10] and I did a project at Real World too, so I was meeting more and more people there. Jacquie Turner, who's my wife now, was chief engineer at Real World in those days, so when an outside engineer would come in, she'd be the assistant.

Help get you up and running and everything?

Yeah. Over a long period of time we ended up falling in love and we married in California. When we started having kids, we both decided L.A. wasn't the place, so we came back to the UK. Peter Gabriel was doing OVO, a collaborative soundtrack [to the Millennium Dome Show]. I mixed three songs on that. Peter liked them so he asked me if I'd be interested in doing the Up album.

That's a sonically interesting record. It's dynamic, with abrupt shifts and changes.

Tons of what I like, plus the voice of Peter Gabriel! What's not to love? Once I got that done, work kept coming in. I ended up being parked in the big room at Real World for about six years. I had all my gear there by then. I was in there more than I wasn't.

At that point, were you starting to get more mixing than engineering?

Well, I was focusing on that. Especially with a family coming. Production gigs were popping up, but I've always been a reluctant producer. When I hear something I like, I think, "Why should I change this? I love this!" That's not usually the sign of a good producer. When you're walking into a project, you've gotta think, "I really love this, but this is how we're going to change it."

And you've worked with producers where you see how they do that. Everyone does it a different way.

Yeah. That's right. It doesn't mean that I won't change things when I produce; but, generally, if I like it enough to produce it, it also means I already like it as it is. As producer you need to be very committed to the band, which often means travel and lots of time. Anyway, mixing seemed to be more in line with the coming family life. Jacquie and I decided to homeschool our kids, which meant we'd all be together 24/7/365. We wanted a studio at home, which took several years; but eventually we got that together.

I find it awesome that Jacquie had the precognition to tell you that if you wanted to keep working, you needed to learn Pro Tools. It's also smart that you set up a room where you can work with any budget.

That's right. I had done a Los Lobos record at Real World around then, and with the studio cost all they could afford to pay for was five days of studio time. I had two mixes going at the same time on the 88 input SSL [console, in order] to do the whole album in five days. But there wasn't enough in the budget to pay me. What was I going to do? I wouldn't ever turn down a record from Los Lobos. That's when Jacquie said, "This isn't going to work. You've gotta get a home studio and learn Pro Tools." Claire Lewis, my Real World assistant and Pro Tools wizard by this time, also helped me make the transition.

You were working at Real World and building a space to work in near your house?

Yes. We lived near a three unit business park, about 500 meters from our house. We were out in the country, so there wasn't much else around. We got a Pro Tools room up and running and I mixed two or three independent bands. Then Suzanne Vega's Beauty & Crime came in at a time I was really struggling in the box.

You were mixing in the box at this point? Was that a weird shift to go from the SSL console at Real World?

It was a really hard change for me. I think Beauty & Crime might have been mixed to a SADiE unit with a Smart [Research] C2 compressor. I seem to remember switching over halfway through the record to what I do now; entirely in the box. I mixed the record, loving the songs and performances, and never thought anything special about the mixes. It went on to win a Grammy for Best Engineered Album.

That must have been a bit of validation too, to hear it sounded good!

I was surprised, to say the least. I do like the sound of the record, but it's not something where I thought, "This sounds like a Grammy." I was struggling! Before starting the mixes, I was waiting for a small analog console to use for summing, but I couldn't get it together in time, so I ended up summing in Pro Tools. It sounded fine. In the end, yes, it was a great confidence builder.

When we're mixing, all of us old people are using skills we've already developed in the analog realm. That's far more important than whether you're working on a console or in the box.

I agree. I get asked about that a lot, because of coming from the analog background. I do think that's a plus; also helps with organization. Combining tracks, keeping track counts down, etc.

Do you color-code tracks?

Yep. I used to color-code our track sheets. We had markers to color the squares. They were actually fluorescent markers and there was a black light in the control room (The Sound Factory, Studio A), so it would really come to life. I do think those analog days helped me a lot in learning to make decisions as you're building up tracks.

If you're working on 24-track, you have to plan ahead.

Absolutely.

What do you see as the other differences in the world of digital?

Well, I guess the debate about the sonics – digital versus analog – I don't find very interesting any more. I look at them now as two totally different but equally valid technologies. Maybe if I was a millionaire I'd build myself an analog studio as well as the Pro Tools room. "Ahh, let's see... what do I use today?" It wouldn't necessarily even be a musical decision for me; it'd be for the fun of it. It really doesn't matter for me, besides just changing things up and doing things a bit different sometimes. It's like picking up different kinds of guitars and playing them. You'll play different on each one. Which one is best? I don't believe in that question; they're just different.

When you take on projects, how do you even figure out what you're dealing with? How to bill based on the amount of work? These are difficult decisions.

I can be quite flexible. I have all kinds of rates and deals that depend on what's come before or after. Track count can play a part. That can be an indicator of complexity and how long the mix might take. I also try to do a test mix, which will let me see how the artist and label reacts, what kind and how many revisions we're headed for. If they love the mix and have some small taste changes, we're swinging. If they don't love it and have major approach kind of changes to the mix, then I need to rethink what I'm doing. If it's a low budget project I'd probably pass on it at that point. Too much time would be lost with me trying to second guess what they want with each song. If there's a larger budget, I can spend more time working with the artist to figure it all out. Then there are the mix deliverables. What kind and how many alternates for each mix? Stems?

They expect it all to be included?

Yes. Full rate projects are fine for all that. Lower budgets, we need to set a plan at the beginning. For stems, I now charge a day rate no matter what the budget. It's a deal breaker for me. If you don't pay for the stems, I'm not going to mix the record.

Right. It's weird with stems. When we're mixing in the box, I feel like you really have to massage that final master stage in the digital realm with plug-ins. Then, when you print a single-element stem, and everything reacts differently in the master stage, is it still a proper stem? Do we do untreated stems?

Yeah, it is odd. What I found is that, first off, I'm not very particular most of the time! If it changes a little bit, it changes a little bit. When I do treated stems, I do each group through my stereo bus. I don't check everything, but I'll spot check. On every project I do, I listen to the first song and think, "That's pretty damn close." There might be places where the vocal seem down a little bit or it comes out too loud, but it's not by much. If you really wanted to work it in, it wouldn't be that big of a stretch. But if your expectation is that it'll sound exactly like the mix, it's not going to fly.

What are people using all these stems for? Remixes? Archiving?

Well, I do understand it. Archiving digital is important. In the analog world gear wasn't changing that fast. With digital the operating systems are quickly changing and taking the plug-ins with them. Your mix isn't playable one year to the next. Artists rely on their back catalog more now for ads, television, movies, etcetera. It can be very lucrative.

Sure, some synch.

It may be that a large company calls and says, "Hey, one of our guys heard this song the other night and we'd like it for a national ad campaign. Do you have a mix without the vocals and the guitars a bit lower in volume?" If you have the stems it's, "Yeah, we can get it to you in ten minutes."

That makes sense, so you can build a modified version. I've run into that with film use.

You never know what's going to come in, and who's going to say what. I remember editing stems of "Everyday is a Winding Road" – the Sheryl Crow song – for the film Phenomenon. They wanted to cut out the line "everybody gets high" thinking it might offend some people. So, we did that and then added "everybody gets low" twice and they loved it. Yes, stems are useful.

Do you manage yourself and deal with your own bookings, or do you have someone filtering things to you?

I've been with Gary Stamler [GSM], who was also Mitchell Froom's manager for decades. We've had a handshake agreement since the mid '80s. He's a lovely guy with a legal background. Neither Mitchell or I were very high-maintenance. It was mainly legal; get the contract sorted and that's it. Gary's semi-retired now, and I have the lovely Nancy Sefton at GSM who takes care of those things for me. She does all the phone grunt work!

In your career path you've seen big budgets and big studios. Then you saw it shift and change. Being able to navigate that successfully and feel satisfied in the jobs that come to you is difficult.

There was a time when so much good work was coming our way. Mitchell was really the one who made those decisions about who to work with – but he would also give me a chance to pipe in. It was a very cool relationship. Our decisions were based on how much we loved the music and how well we connected with the artist. That's changed a little over the years for me. My main criteria now as a mixer is, "Can I make this better?" and, "Will the artist let me do my thing?"

Do you listen to a rough mix right off the bat before saying anything?

Yeah. Rough mixes are so important in this internet world. I want to hear the point where the artist thought the song was cooked. The rough mix shows me that point where they were all happy enough to send it out for others to listen. That tells me a lot. It also tells me what instrument to lead with and helps me hear if I'm missing any files.

I've had that one!

Yes! I've had some screwups with not having a rough mix. "Mix finished." "Hey, where's the piano?" "What piano?"

When you get a session sent to you, are you mostly trying to get raw audio files, or do you ask for a Pro Tools session?

I used to ask for a Pro Tools session consolidated with a common start. But that didn't happen, so I stopped asking. Most people send me what they end with, and I treat it like tape. If there are plug-ins and I have them, I pretty much leave them on until I think they're a problem. If there're too many plug-ins that I don't have, then I get rid of them all and start from scratch. I try to get the artist to render or bounce essential effects because of trouble between different plug-in versions.

How did you find your own voice as an engineer?

MORE INTERVIEWS

Recording Nona Invie’s <i>Self-soothing</I>
INTERVIEWS · ISSUE #167 · Apr 2026

Recording Nona Invie’s Self-soothing

By John Baccigaluppi

On Friday mornings I go to the new releases page on Tidal and wade through the new music released each week. I'll check out records from artists I know, but what I really enjoy is finding new music from an artist I'm not familiar with that resonates with me. On the last day of...

M. Ward
INTERVIEWS · ISSUE #167 · Apr 2026

M. Ward Leaving the Door Open to Chaos

By Geoff Stanfield

Geoff Stanfield spoke with M. Ward for an episode of the Tape OpPodcast in August of 2023, around the time of his album supernatural thing was released. Here they dig into his love of collaborations, his analog approach to recording, and more.

Daniel Tashian
INTERVIEWS · ISSUE #166 · Apr 2026

Daniel Tashian Having Fun

By Larry Crane

In 2017, one of my best friends, Craig Alvin [Tape Op#137], kept texting me about a record he was engineering. He was saying how amazing the process was, and how awesome the results were. The album turned out to be Kacey Musgraves' Golden Hour, which went on to be a platinum...