New Mixing Technique!!!

Morning_Star

Morning_Star

ProTools + Reason user
Well, it's new to me. Until now I've been mixing more traditional. I copied it from a legend, Michael Brauer. I created a mixing template to use it in Reason. It's kinda complicated, but I think that it made this mix much better than my last. So first give me comments on how the MB mix is. Then compare it to the original ruff mix and let me know which sounds better and why.

Here is the new mix version
http://www.mediafire.com/file/zttgodtkxmk/Corey Scott - New ATL MB Mix snip.wav

Here is the original ruff mix
http://www.mediafire.com/file/kzyazyzzwof/Corey Scott - New ATL2 ruff mix snip.wav


If you guys like the Michael Brauer technique mix the best I'll post a tutorial and the template for it.
 
Last edited:
I like the MB mix, sounds much tighter and punchier, more like a 'pro' mix. Id love to know as my mixes are sounding a bit more like example one, just a little bit flat.

Can you share the technique.
 
Sounds like your compressors were driving hard and fast on the original and on the new mix it sounds like the 808 and the snare kept the fast attack and input drive, but eased off the make up, but the synths harsh jump off was smoothed out with a slower attack and a bit shorter release. Synths sound like you bussed them into smooth compression, seemed more glued than the original. Overall mix sounds more smoothed out and proportionate than in your face too much like the original. Just my guess!
 
^ That last sentence was on point with what I was thinkin. The new mix really puts everything in its place nicely which makes the composition sound more tight and concise.

On the rough, it sounds like you're forcing these sounds into our attention.

The new mix seems like it creates an easier listening experience by letting the listener pick out the different sounds of everything going on. Much smoother.

I'll have to look this dude up I guess.
 
He described his mixing setup in a tapeop article very interesting.
 
The only thing is that I mix inside the box and you have indicated mixing inside the box by way of FL Studio. However, Brauer himself says it can't be done. And further states,
"For those who think it can be done, do it. But I'm telling you, I've tried what Mike is talking about and it works in only one application, but not in combination. I'm not going to get into a debate on this issue. As some of the other guys are realizing, my complete multibuss concept was designed to work in the analog world. The feel that I'm looking for gets blurred and the tones get distorted when in the box. Because it is necessary to fully combine the techniques of multibuss compression, parallel compression and the use of send/return compression, the routing in the digital domain causes issues that ADC can't compensate for and causes undesirable results. Meaning it ain't f*cking musical.

Someday, it'll work and when it does, I'll be the first guy to show you the path. How will I know since I don't mix in the box you ask? Because I'm training a guy who does.

So be my guest, ITB, try using MBC (multi buss compression) individually. Combining may get you something, but it won't be my thing. Of course, it goes without saying that it if it sounds awesome, then it doesn't really matter what anybody says; good is good.

For now, just try to enjoy it in the anooolog world...what's left of it"
Click to expand...
So although Morning_Star's mix may sound better than the first... its not Brauer's "thing" as he himself states. The suggestion that it can be done inside the box is made by Mike Caffrey, and audio engineer here in NYC.

However, this is still worth looking into. I am a huge fan and practicioner of tedious submixing when on a serious mix and I'm sure I can find ways for this method of mixing to work inside the box as suggested by Caffrey.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey Morning_Star,

In the tutorial you say to go through the busses by soloing each one and adjusting only the threshold on the relative compressor. I was just taking a look at the devices inside the multi-buss combi and the compressors for busses C and D have the same settings.

Is this correct? And is there a reason why they have the same setting but aren't summed together before compression?

edit: forgot to say Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Morning_Star,

I have one question. Caffrey - who actually wrote the TapeOP article on Brauer's compression - suggested that MB Compression inside the box requires inserting all 4 compressors on each buss and bypassing different compressors as you progress through 1-4.

Why? I don't get why you would do this? What would bypassing extra compressors in your buss do besides waste resources?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In the analog world things are going to sound way more defined and clear when mixing period. But I do believe this method still to work better than traditional mixing for certain cases even in software. My template is designed so that you can still mix the way your use to if you want.

The reason that C and D have the same compressor settings is because they need similar settings. Be free to mess with them if you are comfortable with compressors. They are just generic settings that will work most of the time. The reason you don't buss them the same is because that would defeat the whole purpose for multi bus mixing. You want the compressor to glue together the like sounds so that it fits in the mix much easier. This way you don't have wild sounds pumping your other sounds.

The reason they talk about using the same 4 compressors and bypassing all but one on each bus is for latency issues.

Anyways. I found this method to make my mix much more open and still retain the punchy sound to it. It feels like vocals will just sit in it so I'm really liking the template.

Enjoy
 
Correction: What about effect sends or for those inside the box, the FX channels. Are the FX being sent to their respective buss as well or just to the Stereo buss (the mix buss)?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
HakimCallier said:
Correction: What about effect sends or for those inside the box, the FX channels. Are the FX being sent to their respective buss as well or just to the Stereo buss (the mix buss)?
Click to expand...

The sends should be sent to the respective bus.

Man, I just made a new beat and mixed it with this template. Damn, everything is so open and nice and punchy sounding. It makes the background sounds fade into the background and allow everything else to cut through the mix. This is my new favorite mixing technique.
 
Morning_Star said:
The reason that C and D have the same compressor settings is because they need similar settings. Be free to mess with them if you are comfortable with compressors. They are just generic settings that will work most of the time. The reason you don't buss them the same is because that would defeat the whole purpose for multi bus mixing. You want the compressor to glue together the like sounds so that it fits in the mix much easier. This way you don't have wild sounds pumping your other sounds.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info.

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top