New Mixing Technique!!!

A template for FL would be wonderful, I'm trying to get a grasp of this concept as well.
 
So after composing all the elements to the beat and arranging everything, you mix the track just how you would normally, right?

And THEN send everything to their respective busses based on the guidelines in the tut?

I'm gonna have a good time experimenting with this in the next week or so I think. Really want to thank you for making the combi and template.

Yep. You may have to make some adjustments to your mix after the bussing but it will be close. The more comfortable you get with the set-up the better you can make it sound.

No problem. Just trying to help people out by sharing my secrets.

A template for FL would be wonderful, I'm trying to get a grasp of this concept as well.

I'll make one tomorrow or something and write up the tutorial.
 
Last edited:
Morning_Star you are on fire today today! I have another question... about what Brauer refers to as the "eight submasters". Now this sounds like my submixing technique until he says that he assigns the 7 subs to the 8th so that he can have a group fader before the 2 mix buss.

OK thats all fine. I understand that and I'll try it but then he says,
"If at any point I'm feeling like there's too much compression going on and it's not open anymore, I take that subgroup master and just bring it down."
Is he saying what I think he is saying, that the ABCD styled multi-buss compression is assigned POST-FADER from the instrument group buss? Or is this "subgroup master" refering to something else entirely?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not sure. I have my template set up so if you go in the combinator you can mix in some of the uncompressed signal though. This is channel 6 in the line mixer. Channel 5 is open. This is really my take on his method and so far I'm loving it. My mixes have never been so open because when I mix I'm usually so worried about blending that the mix gets smeared and muddy in some ranges sometimes. Man, I think this is gonna get me more work in town. I'm going to apply this to ProTools and Cubase.
 
Hey,

I was messing around with the template a bit, and I got stuck a few times because sometimes I wanted to use aux effects on my main mixer, but obviously the aux sends are already occupied... how would I go about setting up send effects with this setup?
 
Morning star i too would LOVE you to do an FL Studio Template.
Perhaps you could get the thread stickied?

Thanks Bro.
 
Hey,

I was messing around with the template a bit, and I got stuck a few times because sometimes I wanted to use aux effects on my main mixer, but obviously the aux sends are already occupied... how would I go about setting up send effects with this setup?

For aux sends just split the audio and run one to an fx with it's own channel or add directly to the instrument and adjust the wet/dry.

Morning star i too would LOVE you to do an FL Studio Template.
Perhaps you could get the thread stickied?

Thanks Bro.

I'm going to work on it tonight. Should be up tomorrow.
 
Alot of Michael Brauer's techniques are designed to maximize the capabilities of a console for analog mixing. It can be done in the box, but I would wonder what exactly is the point? You have as many compressors as you need.

Anyway - for those who need an explanation of this, in any DAW, here's what you would do:

Create 4 group busses. These busses are:

A: "Dominant Midrange" - your vocals, your synths
B: "Dominant Rhythm" - your kick, your bass, other things that are holding down the lower mid and low end rhythmic components
C: "Transient Midrange" - guitars, snares (in Hip Hop), anything with transient energy that occupies the same frequency domain as the dominant mids
D: "Warmth" - this is anything that needs to be thickened up - a lot of background stuff, pads, flutes, etc.

Then you assign elements to each buss based on the role they play in the song (hence why I gave them those names).

On each buss channel, you use a compressor or comp/eq combination that you feel compliments that role. It's subjective. Michael Brauer opts to use distressors for his dominant rhythm buss. I would probably go for the API2500. You can put whatever you feel there.

Here's the thing about Michael Brauer. A buddy of mine was his assistant for over a year. From what I've been told, Mike is a hyper-meticulous and brilliant engineer. He has tons of extremely complex systems of maximizing the power of analog mixing. All of these systems require callibration tests and phase tests across each piece of gear - the setup can be arduous and if one thing is out of place it can mess up the process or at least hinder the workflow. IF you are mixing on a console, read MB's site like it's part of the scriptures. If you are ITB, read it for the sake of pursuing knowledge, but don't sweat the details - you can make your own system.
 
wow id love to have a template of this for fruity loops just to mess around with it...any update on this morningstar?
 
Alot of Michael Brauer's techniques are designed to maximize the capabilities of a console for analog mixing. It can be done in the box, but I would wonder what exactly is the point? You have as many compressors as you need.

Anyway - for those who need an explanation of this, in any DAW, here's what you would do:

Create 4 group busses. These busses are:

A: "Dominant Midrange" - your vocals, your synths
B: "Dominant Rhythm" - your kick, your bass, other things that are holding down the lower mid and low end rhythmic components
C: "Transient Midrange" - guitars, snares (in Hip Hop), anything with transient energy that occupies the same frequency domain as the dominant mids
D: "Warmth" - this is anything that needs to be thickened up - a lot of background stuff, pads, flutes, etc.

Then you assign elements to each buss based on the role they play in the song (hence why I gave them those names).

On each buss channel, you use a compressor or comp/eq combination that you feel compliments that role. It's subjective. Michael Brauer opts to use distressors for his dominant rhythm buss. I would probably go for the API2500. You can put whatever you feel there.

Here's the thing about Michael Brauer. A buddy of mine was his assistant for over a year. From what I've been told, Mike is a hyper-meticulous and brilliant engineer. He has tons of extremely complex systems of maximizing the power of analog mixing. All of these systems require callibration tests and phase tests across each piece of gear - the setup can be arduous and if one thing is out of place it can mess up the process or at least hinder the workflow. IF you are mixing on a console, read MB's site like it's part of the scriptures. If you are ITB, read it for the sake of pursuing knowledge, but don't sweat the details - you can make your own system.

great explanation...

thanks Weiss
 
Huh Am I deaf? I cant hear the difference between first and the second sample.. Im so disappointed right now.. I dont know on which part to pay the most attention?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for posting this. Very interesting!

This basically supports the idea that the more ways in which different tracks of audio are processed together the better the 'stick' or 'get glued' together.

I've used multiple busses in this way a number of times, but I don't usually go into such great detail with it.

For example I'll have all Dominant rhythm bussed to an aux together and compressed, and All powerful midrange, but almost everything else will just be in it's own space (straight to L/R). In my dance style techno I'll buss the leads and bass synths together and sidechain the comp on it to the kick. THUMP THUMP :) (I beleive that type of sidechaining started with some DJ's in Paris or something?? idk correct me if I'm wrong)

I would like to try this hyper-detailed bussing technique. Sounds fun! :)

@weisssound - You have good stuff to say on threads. I think I've learned just as much from you as I have from my audio professors
 
Last edited:
I perfer FL STUDIO 9 for all my mixin an post mastering production .. fl is really a beast with all the vst selections...but thats jus me

off topic
 
Thanks for posting this. Very interesting!

This basically supports the idea that the more ways in which different tracks of audio are processed together the better the 'stick' or 'get glued' together.

I've used multiple busses in this way a number of times, but I don't usually go into such great detail with it.

For example I'll have all Dominant rhythm bussed to an aux together and compressed, and All powerful midrange, but almost everything else will just be in it's own space (straight to L/R). In my dance style techno I'll buss the leads and bass synths together and sidechain the comp on it to the kick. THUMP THUMP :) (I beleive that type of sidechaining started with some DJ's in Paris or something?? idk correct me if I'm wrong)

I would like to try this hyper-detailed bussing technique. Sounds fun! :)

@weisssound - You have good stuff to say on threads. I think I've learned just as much from you as I have from my audio professors

It supports the glue concept, but it also allows for a "bigger" sounds by giving you additional control before hitting the 2-buss. In this way, you could for example add a lot of compression to your Dominant Midrange, but less compression to your Rhythm and Transient buss. This would allow you to eek out a little bit of perceived loudness without compromising the punch.

My suggestion is that while this is a great technique, both in maximizing your outboard efficiency, and in having sub-master flexibility, it's not the only way to approach sub-grouping. Sometimes people will do Bass, Drums, Instruments, and Vocals. When I mix house music, or dance style music, I may buss EVERYTHING to a sub-group, EXCEPT the kick drum. The kick gets it's own channel. This isn't a go to method, but sometimes I'll nail a mix, but the kick just won't be quite large enough, and this allows me to do a subtle duck and/or eq to get the whole mix out of the way of the kick.

But for the most part when I'm mixing I don't do much in terms of sub-groups. I'm fortunate enough to have access to good computers with nice software, so I can really load up the channels - and manipulate the unique tracks. The benefit to ITB is that you have unlimited possibilities. The downside to ITB is that you have unlimited possibilities.

Anyway, I'm glad my posts are useful. I'm very much in the same frame as Dave Pensado - the knowledge is meant to be shared! FYI, Dave and I will be having a Skype chat tomorrow for the next TheProAudioFiles.com article. Should be really interesting. We're gonna nerd it up hard.

Oh, yeah, and I have a facebook page now for Weiss-Sound (you just search Weiss-Sound and it pops up as a "company" even though I'm just one dude). I had a long talk with one of my client's managers and he said I absolutely must have a facebook page for my business. So I made one. Eventually I'll even figure out what to do with it.
 
Back
Top