The seventh episode of the Knobs Podcast takes aim at something most producers are quietly proud of: their perfectionism. But instead of celebrating the endless hunt for a flawless mix, Simon Moro and Terry Hart argue that chasing perfection is one of the most expensive, creativity-killing habits in music production.
The question the episode keeps circling back to is uncomfortable:
If you can’t stay objective past the first half hour, how could you possibly trust a decision you make in month six?
Drawing on decades of mixing records under real deadlines, the conversation lands somewhere that will sting anyone who has ever “just needed a few more days” on a mix.
The First 30 Minutes Decide the Mix
One of the strongest themes in the episode is that the best mixing decisions are fast, emotional, and instinctive, and they nearly always happen early. Push past that window and you are not improving the mix so much as drifting away from why it worked in the first place.
The problem is objectivity. It is hard enough to stay objective in the first half an hour. Six months later, you are no longer judging the mix, you are judging your mood, your ears, and the room on that particular day.
- The magic usually lands in the first 20 to 30 minutes
- Objectivity fades fast, so early decisions are the honest ones
- “One-percenters” are real, but they hit diminishing returns quickly
- A song is roughly a day’s work, and on average two to three songs a day get to a finishable state
“The search for perfection is a wasted life. Let’s make more songs.”
The Tattoo Philosophy of Finished Mixes
Simon offers a reframe for anyone haunted by their old mixes. Put on a record you signed off years ago and you will hear things you would never do now. But in the moment you sent it to mastering, you were completely happy, and that means you were right.
A finished mix is a tattoo. You might wince at one or two later, but that is not the point. It is a snapshot of who you were and what you heard when you made it. The job of a mix is to make you feel something, and if it did, it worked.
Say Yes to the Idea
A big divide between people who last in this industry and people who do not is how they react when someone suggests a change to their mix. The instinct, especially early in a career, is to get defensive. The professional move is the opposite.
As the guys put it, you genuinely cannot lose by seeing an idea through. Worst case, you go around in a circle and end up back where you started, except now you are there with certainty instead of doubt. Trying a client’s idea does not mean you failed the first time. It means you are confident enough to explore.
Working to the Clock
Time constraints are not the enemy of quality, they are part of what makes a professional. You could spend weeks chasing another two percent, but the pros know when a mix is working and move on. Some of the guys’ favourite mixes came out of sessions where they had an hour or two per song and no choice but to commit.
The Tools That Fix Problems We Created
Here the conversation gets pointed. So many modern tools, pitch correction, dynamic EQ, sophisticated masking reduction, exist to solve problems we invented by walking away from performance and arrangement discipline. When you only had eight tracks, the arrangement had to be solid and only the best players made it to tape.
The example that lands hardest is Queen’s “Somebody to Love.” Pull up the stems and the wall of sound you imagined turns out to be mostly bass, piano and drums, played with absolute conviction. The impact is in the performance, not in a hundred layers or a stack of samples.
- More tracks often means weaker arrangements propped up by processing
- Six layered kick samples create phase and transient problems a good mic never would
- Reaching for a plugin is often a substitute for playing the part harder, or again
When the Master Undoes the Mix
The guys have both felt mastering quality slipping over the last few years, and they are careful about why. A master is only ever as good as the mix going in. But the subtler frustration is what happens to intention. The moves they automate into a mix, a three decibel lift into a final chorus, a slow build across a whole song, can get quietly squashed at the mastering stage. Reduce that lift to half a decibel and the impact they worked for is simply gone.
Their view is that modern masters often need automation of their own, not a single set-and-forget setting. A good mastering engineer finds the song’s arc and protects it, rather than milking every last bit of loudness out of the biggest section. As they put it, a master has to do more than a limiter could, or something has gone wrong. The best ones will even send a version sitting below level, trusting the material rather than crushing it.
Let It Be What It Is
The most useful idea in the episode might be the simplest. Simon recorded a piano album next to an artist’s fireplace at home. Judged against an expensive concert grand in a hall, it sounded like a problem. The moment they stopped fighting it and let it be the artist’s piano, the instrument they grew up playing, the same recording became perfect, because it finally sounded like what it actually was.
“Let it be what it is. And then all those problems you’re trying to fix suddenly disappear.”
Final Thoughts
Neither Simon nor Terry is arguing for laziness or lower standards. Care, taste, and craft still matter enormously. Their point is that perfection is a moving target, and the cost of chasing it is real: lost momentum, lost objectivity, and a mountain of songs that never got finished.
The healthier goal is a mix that made you feel something, delivered on time, and left you free to go and make the next one. Have guts. There is no such thing as perfection.
