Login / Register
 
I want to do the Michael Brauer trick OTB
New Reply
Subscribe
littleba
Thread Starter
#1
29th November 2006
Old 29th November 2006
  #1
Gear interested
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Location: sweden
Posts: 23

Thread Starter
littleba is offline
I want to do the Michael Brauer trick OTB

Hi all!
I want to do parallel compression on 4 stereo busses,nowadays known as the Michael brauer trick if you are familiar with it. (He explains it in tapeop)
Sold my ssl a couple of years ago and I miss that way of working!
My question is:is there a produkt thet lets me do just that without having to
buy a large console again?
Been toying with Tonelux but that gets really expensive with all the modules needed to do just that.(8 mx2´s,8 tr8´s and summer units + vrack and psu)
If I want just the 4 stereo buses with option to mix them together in any fashion,
fed from PT into my patchbay,and insert outboard comps on them,and mix it all with the "clean "stereo bus-is there a product out there for me?
__________________
littleba
#2
29th November 2006
Old 29th November 2006
  #2
Lives for gear
 
danasti's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,198

Send a message via MSN to danasti
danasti is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by littleba View Post
If I want just the 4 stereo buses with option to mix them together in any fashion,
fed from PT into my patchbay,and insert outboard comps on them,and mix it all with the "clean "stereo bus-is there a product out there for me?
Set up the busses in PT - set the outs on the D/A to correspond to those busses (an any individual tracks on the other D/A outs). Apply what you want to each of the busses via your patchbay and follow that with a summing box or two. I.E Shadow Hills / Neve / Nicerizer / ETC.. These sum those () to stereo (smart C2 or similar) back into A/D and VIOLA - your brain and ears will be fried come back tomorrow and clean up the mess before anyone stops by for a listen...

Is this what you're looking for?

#3
29th November 2006
Old 29th November 2006
  #3
Lives for gear
 
gainreduction's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,696

gainreduction is online now
Any 8-buss mixer will work, technically that is.

Get a good sounding console (doesn't mean it has to be large, see above) or find a way to do it ITB like danasti describes it. The ITB route might open another can of worms but might work aswell, it really depends on your system and how you set it up.
__________________
http://www.detonamusic.com
#4
1st December 2006
Old 1st December 2006
  #4
Lives for gear
 
numrologst's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,955

numrologst is offline
You don't gotta get yourself another ssl, but bite the bullet and get you a decent midsize console with 24 busses.

An 8 or 16 bus console is a novelty and you will be sorry later.

I can't recommend a multibus setup itb. I hate it, but that is another can of worms.

Alhough you can do it itb like danasti said.

But remember michael brauer's approach wasn't just 4 busses. There was an aux send with 1176's on it. Not to mention numerous other mono busses with comps and eq's..> And obviously his setup is ever changing.

And he never said he used parallel compression. Actually I believe he said he wasn't a fan of parallel compression, and he does not use parallel compression in his multibus setup.
#5
1st December 2006
Old 1st December 2006
  #5
Lives for gear
 
tomdarude's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Location: germany
Posts: 1,807

tomdarude is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by numrologst View Post
...There was an aux send with 1176's on it. Not to mention numerous other mono busses with comps and eq's..
this actually is parallel compression!!

though his 4 main busses that he routes his tracks into (into 1 or more of them that is) have "normal", serial compression inserted (despite the last "clean" main bus).

cheers tom
__________________
"You'd be surprised that "f*ck it!" can be a profound philosophy."
picksail; 28th August 2008, 08:55 AM


"The best sounding sluttiest gear of all time... is a great song" --Greg Wells



http://www.hi-endgear.com


http://www.audio-import.de
littleba
Thread Starter
#6
1st December 2006
Old 1st December 2006
  #6
Gear interested
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Location: sweden
Posts: 23

Thread Starter
littleba is offline
true it is

Tomdarude is right..
Since one stereo bus is"clean" and some stuff goes to both a compressed bus
and a "clean"bus at the same time that makes it parallell compression....
This is what makes the setup complicated to do without a console...
Any tips on hardware that lets you do this?
#7
1st December 2006
Old 1st December 2006
  #7
Lives for gear
 
numrologst's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,955

numrologst is offline
im not gonna argue with you guys, but he came and posted under a similar topic a while back and clearly states that he doesn't think of the aux 1176 and the unprocessed stereo bus as parallel compresion.

The 1176 aux is totally processed ie compression used. Parallel compression would be mixing uncompressed signal with compressed signal... In the case of the 1176's anything going to them is compressed, so it is merely double compression, not parallel.

The unprocessed stereo bus he said does not get anything that he would send to bus A,B,C, or D. Thus there would be no parallel compression.

He stated that if you have to parallel compress, then you are doing his multibus technique wrong, but he also said that you should do whatever works for you.

that's neither here nor there.

-----------
If you want to do a multibus setup, then you are obviously gonna need as many busses as you want to use. So at least 8 for 4 stereo comp busses. But then consider you need aux's. and more busses for mono comps, effects sends, reverbs sends, etc.

Then you are gonna need the realestate on the console as far as channels go...

I use a 40 channel console that has 8 stereo stereo modules. I have 24 busses....

Busses 17-24 for me are my multibusses. Busses 1-16 are for effects sends, and mono comps.

I return all my multibus comps to my first 4 stereo modules, My Aux comp returns to stereo mod 5, and my reverbs return to stereo mods 6-8. Then i return my mono compressors to their own channel.

For me, my starting setup is this:

Bus A: Chandler ltd-2--->Api 550a
Buss B: Distressor-------> Lil freq's
Buss C: 1176-------------> Chandler tone control
Buss D: EHX Ny2a------->Api 550a w/ purple audio op amps

Drawmer 1968 on my aux's

Then I have 2 dbx 160's mono, 4 rnc's mono, aphex 661 mono, purple mc77 mono, dolby noise reduction modded mono.

So you need some cool comps, and a decent size console
#8
2nd December 2006
Old 2nd December 2006
  #8
MonsterIsland.com
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 4,637

Mike Caffrey is offline
I suspect we'll see a post from him shortly, but he never said he doesn't like parallel compression.

With the way people are counting, there are "6" busses. Four processed with a specific set up, the stereo, unprocessed, and the 1176s which are on aux sends (which you can argue is semantics whether it's a buss or not).

There are definite patterns for the starting point, but no rules for the end point.

It's possible that something sent to the B buss, may also end up sent directly to the stereo buss. And then if necessary, a little sent via the aux sends to the 1176s. Or maybe not. Maybe just the B buss.

If he send something the B and the stereo technically that would be parallel compressing. B and A would be "double bussing" becuase it's two processed busses. B, A and the stereo has no official name, but at that point it's just about making it sound good.

So while the routing is "parallel comrpesssion" I'd argue that it's function is not what most people mane when they say "parallel comrpession". In my expereince, people smash something with their parallel bus and blend it in with the stereo. I dislike it as a funamental method becuase I set it as a hack. You use your uncompressed signal to bail you out of the problem you've created from overcompressing your parallel buss. When done right, you canget that same sound without being in parallel and without having dynamics issues.

So while MHB's routing defintely can involve true parallel buss comrpession, I'd argue that people shouldn't think of it that way because he's not doing what most people think of when the say "parallel compression".

on the other hand, with individual tracks, there is definitely parallel compression - potentially on anything. Probably common on kick and snare, certainly on bass, maybe on vocals, but his vocal approach is really it's own animal.

He usually refers to this invidual parallel uses as send/returns. On reason I like that term is that, in my mind, it's less specific. It could be sent from a buss, aux send, small fader, whatever. And, when it's returned, it can come back on a fader and be set to any level (or even automated) and assigned to just the stereo or any or even all of the 4 main processed busses.

The way I see it is that the multi-buss approach is a method of preventing bad interactions within a stereo buss compressor. All of the other things done with in the busses, like send/returns are not unique to the multi-buss cancept, but are integral to his mixing style.

He orignally develped multi-buss as a way to protect the vocal from the bass. That's a great experiment to try.

Take a bass track and a vocal track. Run them both to the stereo buss, with a compressor on it, an start raising the bass while listening just to the vocal. Fo course the bass will get louder, but the bass will actually make the vocal disapear. There will making from volume, but also from the gain reduction of the stereo compressor.

Now, set up two busses - A for the vocal, B for the bass. Compress them both and then return them to the stereo buss, with the same stereo compression.

Now raise that bass fader and it will start "pressing into the rubber sheet" (to reference a recent thread) and the bass will not be able to make the vocal disappear.

Once this makes sense, set up your multi-buss set up the way you need to to group the instruments the way you hear them interacting. Bass and drums together is a natural combination. Center instruments like guitars may require a C buss. Do you really need a D buss? Maybe. Maybe that's your "vibe buss". Maybe it's very bright or dark and thick. Maybe it's identical to C and you've got electric guitars in one, and acoustics in the otehr because you need and exact balance that doesn't get altered by the performance.

What you do is determined by the music.
#9
2nd December 2006
Old 2nd December 2006
  #9
Lives for gear
 
gainreduction's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,696

gainreduction is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey View Post
The way I see it is that the multi-buss approach is a method of preventing bad interactions within a stereo buss compressor. All of the other things done with in the busses, like send/returns are not unique to the multi-buss cancept, but are integral to his mixing style.
thumbsup Mike.
#10
2nd December 2006
Old 2nd December 2006
  #10
Gear addict
 
eskay's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 374

eskay is offline
Can somebody please post a link to the tape op article.
That would be fantastic. Many thanks.
#11
2nd December 2006
Old 2nd December 2006
  #11
Lives for gear
 
gainreduction's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,696

gainreduction is online now
#12
2nd December 2006
Old 2nd December 2006
  #12
Pragmatic Snob
 
u b k's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Location: The Land of Sunshine
Posts: 12,297

u b k is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey View Post
I dislike it as a funamental method becuase I set it as a hack. You use your uncompressed signal to bail you out of the problem you've created from overcompressing your parallel buss. When done right, you canget that same sound without being in parallel and without having dynamics issues.

my experience shows me that this is true, although i wouldn't use the word 'hack' as it implies one way is somehow less good or appropriate. i see them as different paths to the same end. but there's nothing that parallel compression gives me that i can't get by just dialing in the drum comp to perfection. smashed, with punch, from one compressor... it's not that hard to do, with the right tool.

i don't even use drum buss compression any more; just some light (2-3db), FAST compression on the kick, some on the snare, and then the mix compressor brings it home. it's amazing how so much of the magic of this stuff lays in the simplest, most basic thing which is so frequently glossed over in many guys' mixing process: the fader mix.

balances are *everything*, and the more i do this the more i learn how to take things further and further using faders alone. and that, imho, is the key to getting drums rocking without needing to invoke parallel compression, or even buss compression.

god bless touch mode automation.


gregoire
del
ubk
.
__________________


Kush Audio: Where High End Keeps Getting Higher

.........

Kush Audio: Where High End Keeps Getting Higher
____________________
Quote
1
#13
2nd December 2006
Old 2nd December 2006
  #13
MonsterIsland.com
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 4,637

Mike Caffrey is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by u b k View Post
my experience shows me that this is true, although i wouldn't use the word 'hack' as it implies one way is somehow less good or appropriate. i see them as different paths to the same end. but there's nothing that parallel compression gives me that i can't get by just dialing in the drum comp to perfection. smashed, with punch, from one compressor... it's not that hard to do, with the right tool.

i don't even use drum buss compression any more; just some light (2-3db), FAST compression on the kick, some on the snare, and then the mix compressor brings it home. it's amazing how so much of the magic of this stuff lays in the simplest, most basic thing which is so frequently glossed over in many guys' mixing process: the fader mix.

balances are *everything*, and the more i do this the more i learn how to take things further and further using faders alone. and that, imho, is the key to getting drums rocking without needing to invoke parallel compression, or even buss compression.

god bless touch mode automation.


gregoire
del
ubk
.
I don't mean in in too perjorative a sense, more the computer progammer meaning - a short cut that's not as sophisticated as the longer method.

I'm not saying there's never a time to use it. I just think it's a little misleading.

It's also very difficult to A/B properly.
#14
2nd December 2006
Old 2nd December 2006
  #14
Lives for gear
 
not_so_new's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,754

not_so_new is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by littleba View Post
Hi all!
I want to do parallel compression on 4 stereo busses,nowadays known as the Michael brauer trick if you are familiar with it. (He explains it in tapeop)
Sold my ssl a couple of years ago and I miss that way of working!
My question is:is there a produkt thet lets me do just that without having to
buy a large console again?
Been toying with Tonelux but that gets really expensive with all the modules needed to do just that.(8 mx2´s,8 tr8´s and summer units + vrack and psu)
If I want just the 4 stereo buses with option to mix them together in any fashion,
fed from PT into my patchbay,and insert outboard comps on them,and mix it all with the "clean "stereo bus-is there a product out there for me?
I am working towards this exact setup and I went with a Tonelux rig.

If you want to save the money skip the MX2's and get 2 FX2 modules and 2 FX2+ modules. The FX2 will give you 1 stereo buss each and the FX2+ will give you one stereo buss and 1 master summing buss each. MUCH cheaper route. You do loose some features like solo, effects busses and Shadow Mix but you also have 12 slots left to expand.

A great solution if you want to start basic and grow or if you want to just have a "summing box" with vibe... well at least I hear it has vibe, I am still waiting on my cables and some modules before I can use mine but you get the point.

thumbsup
__________________
Michael
#15
7th December 2006
Old 7th December 2006
  #15
Lives for gear
 
numrologst's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,955

numrologst is offline
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Jules / So much gear, so little time!
0
Michael Brauer / So much gear, so little time!
21
Michael Brauer / Q&A with Michael H. Brauer
1
Jules / Q&A with Michael H. Brauer
0

Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.