The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Parallel compression ITB: Andrew Scheps vs Michael Brauer
Old 25th June 2018
  #1
Lives for gear
 
mutetourettes's Avatar
 

Parallel compression ITB: Andrew Scheps vs Michael Brauer

ok - so both Andrew Scheps and Michael Brauer seem to use loads of parallel compression on various sends, different busses etc..

but as far as I can tell Andrew Scheps is happy to do it all ITB, whereas Michael Brauer maintains (maintained?) that ITB cannot get all the delay compensation right...

Anyone have any thoughts on this? any idea if there's a significant difference in style which means ITB works for Scheps where it doesn't for Brauer?
Old 26th June 2018
  #2
Lives for gear
These are two of my favorite mixers

I don’t know for sure, but “I think” it may have something to do with the layers of parallel compression going on...???

So I know I’ve read that MB will send things to compressors via an aux (parallel) and then everything also goes to one of (5?) busses...ABCD and stereo.

So for example, the snare may go to the B buss which is for drums and bass...but it may also send to a dbx that is on an aux, and that return may send to the B bus as well, or maybe the B bus and stereo, etc. Those may then also go to his 1176 bus for more umph... This is where things can get weird.

I know if I take a vocal, send it to an aux for parallel compression, then try and send both of those to a master vocal aux, I usually get phase issues.

I’m not sure how Scheps works exactly...but “I think” he may have multiple busses set up that he can send stuff too for different flavors...all maybe going out to a master fader? Anyways...I don’t think there are as many “layers” of parallel compression going on coming from all directions if that makes sense. I could be wrong,

I love MB, and am really intrigued by his approach. I’ve studied it and tried it, and at the end of the day while I do borrow some ideas...I can’t make his exact layout work for me...I’m not him, and don’t have his gear. I take things that work from all my favorite mixers and use them in my own way. So I’d say just experiment and figure out how deep you can go with these approaches and what works best for you!
Old 26th June 2018
  #3
I also would like to know how to do it ITB without getting phasing issues.

Working in Logic X Pro gives me phasing issues with the aux/bus channels because I'm using different plugins (of course) on each channel. I don't know how to get around it. Haven't tried Protools yet.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SDB_12 View Post
These are two of my favorite mixers

I don’t know for sure, but “I think” it may have something to do with the layers of parallel compression going on...???

So I know I’ve read that MB will send things to compressors via an aux (parallel) and then everything also goes to one of (5?) busses...ABCD and stereo.

So for example, the snare may go to the B buss which is for drums and bass...but it may also send to a dbx that is on an aux, and that return may send to the B bus as well, or maybe the B bus and stereo, etc. Those may then also go to his 1176 bus for more umph... This is where things can get weird.

I know if I take a vocal, send it to an aux for parallel compression, then try and send both of those to a master vocal aux, I usually get phase issues.

I’m not sure how Scheps works exactly...but “I think” he may have multiple busses set up that he can send stuff too for different flavors...all maybe going out to a master fader? Anyways...I don’t think there are as many “layers” of parallel compression going on coming from all directions if that makes sense. I could be wrong,

I love MB, and am really intrigued by his approach. I’ve studied it and tried it, and at the end of the day while I do borrow some ideas...I can’t make his exact layout work for me...I’m not him, and don’t have his gear. I take things that work from all my favorite mixers and use them in my own way. So I’d say just experiment and figure out how deep you can go with these approaches and what works best for you!
Old 26th June 2018
  #4
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by djivano View Post
I also would like to know how to do it ITB without getting phasing issues.

Working in Logic X Pro gives me phasing issues with the aux/bus channels because I'm using different plugins (of course) on each channel. I don't know how to get around it. Haven't tried Protools yet.

You can do almost all that stuff with the wet/dry mix on the compressors, no need for parallel bussing.
Old 26th June 2018
  #5
Lives for gear
 
Funny Cat's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
You can do almost all that stuff with the wet/dry mix on the compressors, no need for parallel bussing.

This is true but you are missing out on a lot if you only use the wet/dry knobs on plugin comps. Reason being, a whole new world is open if you EQ the send before it hits the compressor. To take it one step further you could use a transient plugin, or saturation plugin or any combination of plugs before it hits the compressor and totally get the compressor to react and give back something you never expected.
Old 26th June 2018
  #6
This is indeed the way I would like to use it. A dry/wet compression knob inside the plugin is fine, but many of my favorite Waves/UAD comps unfortunately don't have this feature ;-)

Would be great to have the separate channels without the phasing thing.

If anyone knows the trick?!...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Funny Cat View Post
This is true but you are missing out on a lot if you only use the wet/dry knobs on plugin comps. Reason being, a whole new world is open if you EQ the send before it hits the compressor. To take it one step further you could use a transient plugin, or saturation plugin or any combination of plugs before it hits the compressor and totally get the compressor to react and give back something you never expected.
Old 26th June 2018
  #7
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Funny Cat View Post
This is true but you are missing out on a lot if you only use the wet/dry knobs on plugin comps. Reason being, a whole new world is open if you EQ the send before it hits the compressor. To take it one step further you could use a transient plugin, or saturation plugin or any combination of plugs before it hits the compressor and totally get the compressor to react and give back something you never expected.
Fair enough but the cats he mentioned don’t exploit that technique at all as far as i have seen.
Plus if you are going to start mangling just the send channel you are going to get more additional phase issues, there is always lin phase gear though.
Old 26th June 2018
  #8
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by djivano View Post
This is indeed the way I would like to use it. A dry/wet compression knob inside the plugin is fine, but many of my favorite Waves/UAD comps unfortunately don't have this feature ;-)

Would be great to have the separate channels without the phasing thing.

If anyone knows the trick?!...
You need the delay compensation to be on and working correctly for a start.
Old 26th June 2018
  #9
Lives for gear
 

Not understanding (or let's say seeing) any of these phase issues. Been doing this via dedicated sub buses for years in Sonar 8 and well before.
Old 26th June 2018
  #10
Gear Addict
 
ltjohnrambo's Avatar
 

Has anyone tried Metaplugin to route wet/dry compression or effects? Looks like it might be quicker way of accomplishing parallel processing.
Old 26th June 2018
  #11
Lives for gear
 
Funny Cat's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
Fair enough but the cats he mentioned don’t exploit that technique at all as far as i have seen.
Plus if you are going to start mangling just the send channel you are going to get more additional phase issues, there is always lin phase gear though.
Not to go back and forth but I think it's real important to bring this up in this conversation. Perhaps Brauer and Scheps don't EQ/process their sends to parallel busses, I can't be sure - but I know a few guys who make a crapload of $$$ off their music. Some of it you've heard. I learned this processing technique from them. When I started EQ'ing and processing the sends to my parallel busses my vocals in particular went up like four notches. I'll use this technique on other sources too when needed and I find I need parallel processing a LOT more when mixing ITB.



P.S. The two main DAW's I use don't have any discernible issues with phase when working this way, so I suppose that's my frame of reference just FYI.



[Late EDIT] Same here regarding the below post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne View Post
Not understanding (or let's say seeing) any of these phase issues. Been doing this via dedicated sub buses for years in Sonar 8 and well before.
Old 26th June 2018
  #12
Gear Guru
 
Drumsound's Avatar
Having a mix know is really different than having 2 different faders that react to one another.
Old 27th June 2018
  #13
yeah, using protools 12 here. no phasing/delay compensation issues whatsoever and I do some crazy bussing schemes for TV/film mixing. Lots of parallel compression being sent to multiple busses being recorded to mulitple audio tracks which are then bussed to other multiple audio tracks which are then bussed to a stereo and a 5.1 mix, with all sorts of processing on all the busses between audio tracks and parallel compression going on everywhere.

No problems at all here.
Old 27th June 2018
  #14
Lives for gear
 
Funny Cat's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch View Post
yeah, using protools 12 here. no phasing/delay compensation issues whatsoever and I do some crazy bussing schemes for TV/film mixing. Lots of parallel compression being sent to multiple busses being recorded to mulitple audio tracks which are then bussed to other multiple audio tracks which are then bussed to a stereo and a 5.1 mix, with all sorts of processing on all the busses between audio tracks and parallel compression going on everywhere.

No problems at all here.


Hmmm...now I’m wondering if the phase thing has to do with earlier versions of protools? I have PT12 (2018) but I only use it to open sessions and extract raw files or stems.
Old 27th June 2018
  #15
Lives for gear
 

Not sure about Brauer but Scheps busses multiple instruments to the same compressor parallel, which can’t be achieved with a mix knob.

If your DAW doesn’t have delay compensation you will have phase issues with parallel compression. Some people say you will have phase issues regardless of delay comp but that hasn’t been my experience and doesn’t seem to be holding back Scheps or Brauer or thousands of other engineers using the technique.
Old 27th June 2018
  #16
Lives for gear
 
toledo3's Avatar
 

Brauer probably tried it years back when it was a little more flakey, and just has his method now. Nothing wrong with that.

But it’s different than it not working as a rule.
Old 27th June 2018
  #17
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Funny Cat View Post
Hmmm...now I’m wondering if the phase thing has to do with earlier versions of protools? I have PT12 (2018) but I only use it to open sessions and extract raw files or stems.
There was issues with PT 10.
Old 27th June 2018
  #18
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Funny Cat View Post
Not to go back and forth but I think it's real important to bring this up in this conversation. Perhaps Brauer and Scheps don't EQ/process their sends to parallel busses, I can't be sure - but I know a few guys who make a crapload of $$$ off their music. Some of it you've heard. I learned this processing technique from them. When I started EQ'ing and processing the sends to my parallel busses my vocals in particular went up like four notches. I'll use this technique on other sources too when needed and I find I need parallel processing a LOT more when mixing ITB.



P.S. The two main DAW's I use don't have any discernible issues with phase when working this way, so I suppose that's my frame of reference just FYI.



[Late EDIT] Same here regarding the below post.
Well look, if it sounds good it is but with regular eq(not lin phase) you are creating phase shift against the original track. Perhaps the levels you run the para tracks at make the point moot, but it’s happening. Its good to be aware if what you are doing so you can solve the issue quick if it becomes one is all.
Run mono and try running the eq’d/comped para track at equal volume and flip the polarity and see what you hear.
Old 27th June 2018
  #19
Lives for gear
 
Funny Cat's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
Well look, if it sounds good it is but with regular eq(not lin phase) you are creating phase shift against the original track. Perhaps the levels you run the para tracks at make the point moot, but it’s happening. Its good to be aware if what you are doing so you can solve the issue quick if it becomes one is all.
Run mono and try running the eq’d/comped para track at equal volume and flip the polarity and see what you hear.

I don’t disagree with you. I’ve just found it helpful to EQ the send before hitting a character comp for certain signals. Not all. Just sometimes. Makes the compressor react differently. Mostly I’m cutting lows heading into the comp.

Sometimes I’ll use a plugin like kush Omega to sort of push the gain into the comp. That can yield a cool sound too. So again I don’t strictly disagree with you here.

You are correct though. In fact all EQ’s work off of phase shift, it’s just that phase shift isn’t neccessarily a bad thing e.g. the Tchad Blake parallel kick process where you push the mids and literally invert the phase then blend in with the original kick.
Old 27th June 2018
  #20
Gear Nut
 
bandso's Avatar
I believe that Sheps has a Waves plugin for doing this stuff ITB. It's called Parallel Particles.
Old 27th June 2018
  #21
Lives for gear
 
iangomes's Avatar
You can get some minor phase issues without realizing when parallel bussing. Best way to avoid it is to put the same chain on both busses, but bypass the ones you don't need on each. Try that, then start deactivating some of the bypassed ones and see how the phase relationship changes.

(In my experience)
Old 27th June 2018
  #22
So everybody using PT12 on a Mac seems to agree to have no phasing issues when applying parallel bus techniques ITB?
Then I have to change to PT12 then for mixing.

Maybe try the 'Waves Parallel Particles' first, before upgrading to PT12
Old 27th June 2018
  #23
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
Well look, if it sounds good it is but with regular eq(not lin phase) you are creating phase shift against the original track. Perhaps the levels you run the para tracks at make the point moot, but it’s happening. Its good to be aware if what you are doing so you can solve the issue quick if it becomes one is all.
Run mono and try running the eq’d/comped para track at equal volume and flip the polarity and see what you hear.
I think you have a misconception about what a linear phase EQ filter is. Linear phase EQ creates a phase shift based on the Q starting from 0 degrees outside of the Q width to a phase shift of 180 at the center point of the filter.

It’s just that the phase shift is LINEAR from 0 to 180 and back to 0 again, as opposed to a non linear phase EQ which the phase does not shift linearly along the bell curve of the Q. Or a minimum phase filter which tries to have almost no phase shift until the center frequency and then it shifts 180 degrees.

Linear Phase EQ vs Minimum Phase EQ — Pro Audio Files

FabFilter Pro-Q 2 Help - Processing mode

Linear Phase EQ Explained - Crave DSP

The difference between minimum-phase and linear-phase EQ on transient signals such as snare drum

The downside to linear phase EQ is the pre-ringing it creates on transients. This is why linear phase EQs are usually never good on drums.

And in terms of latency and parallel processing a linear phase EQ has a lot of latency compared to a minimum phase EQ. Because of that and the pre-ringing minimum phase EQ is usually going to be the better choice for parallel processing.
Old 27th June 2018
  #24
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

There is 0 phase shift (delay) from linear phase filters, assuming pdc works correctly.
Old 27th June 2018
  #25
Lives for gear
 
mutetourettes's Avatar
 

also be aware that Scheps parallel particles has lots of internal parallel paths, carefully timed to cause no problems internally - but he said in an interview don't use it in parallel itself as it will cause issues... so I don't know why he'd say that.. maybe that plugin in particular (see what I did there?) doesn't play nice with PDC?
Old 27th June 2018
  #26
Lives for gear
 
e-are's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle View Post
Fair enough but the cats he mentioned don’t exploit that technique at all as far as i have seen.
Plus if you are going to start mangling just the send channel you are going to get more additional phase issues, there is always lin phase gear though.
Yep. Linear phase or Mautoalign is what I use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ltjohnrambo View Post
Has anyone tried Metaplugin to route wet/dry compression or effects? Looks like it might be quicker way of accomplishing parallel processing.
Old 27th June 2018
  #27
Lives for gear
 
e-are's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltjohnrambo View Post
Has anyone tried Metaplugin to route wet/dry compression or effects? Looks like it might be quicker way of accomplishing parallel processing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by djivano View Post
So everybody using PT12 on a Mac seems to agree to have no phasing issues when applying parallel bus techniques ITB?
Then I have to change to PT12 then for mixing.

Maybe try the 'Waves Parallel Particles' first, before upgrading to PT12
No phase issues for me either in pt12 itb. Outboard, yes, but Mautoalign fixes that.
Old 27th June 2018
  #28
Thanks!
Then PT12 together MAutoAlign is the route to go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Etch-A-Sketch View Post
yeah, using protools 12 here. no phasing/delay compensation issues whatsoever and I do some crazy bussing schemes for TV/film mixing. Lots of parallel compression being sent to multiple busses being recorded to mulitple audio tracks which are then bussed to other multiple audio tracks which are then bussed to a stereo and a 5.1 mix, with all sorts of processing on all the busses between audio tracks and parallel compression going on everywhere.

No problems at all here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by e-are View Post
No phase issues for me either in pt12 itb. Outboard, yes, but Mautoalign fixes that.
Old 27th June 2018
  #29
Lives for gear
 

I been using Cakewalk since 95 and Sonar since. I've never had issues with phase form plugins of any kind or configuration.

The exception of course would be the bleed over between drum mics recording but that's a whole different topic involving placement of multiple mics capturing a source at different distances.

I suspect your issue involves a lack of latency compensation. All the DAW programs I've used over the years like Steinberg, Sonar, Reaper etc have plugin compensation. The most you might get is a playback timing issue when adding a plugin. They corrects itself by simply stopping and restarting the playback.

Running compressors in parallel may have different attack, release times which can sound like a phase issue bit it truly has nothing to do with phase, its simply an control timing difference.
Old 27th June 2018
  #30
Lives for gear
 
Funny Cat's Avatar
Let's try and clear up the whole Linear Phase confusion. A quick google search says Linear phase EQ's do cause phase shift. Even the article that @ Etch-A-Sketch linked says it causes delay i.e. "phase shift".

However the delay happens linearly in ALL frequencies as Etch stated, which tends to mask the phase shift from the ear and make it less obvious, the side effect being ringing. The wording in some of these articles can be quite confusing but it's important to realize that a "delay" or "latency" in a signal of any kind against the original is in essence "phase shift".

If you put the Linear phase EQ on the track by itself, then the phase shift would probably be undetectable, unless of course you had multiple close mics on sources in the vicinity capturing bleed during tracking. However, if you used it on a parallel track, then the phase shift (latency, delay, whatever you want to call it) might be heard since there is an unaffected original to compare it against. As always, if it sounds good...then it IS good!



Linear Phase EQ Explained - Crave DSP

Quote:
Linear Phase EQ Explained
30 May 2017

Linear phase EQ is the most transparent sounding type of equalization, however, it can create some very undesirable side effects, namely increased latency and pre-ringing. In this article we'll take an in-depth look at linear phase EQ and provide some valuable tips on how to minimize pre-ringing.


https://www.***********************/...e-eq-explained

Quote:
A linear-phase EQ eliminates phasing by time shifting the frequencies (all the frequencies) so that the phase is not heard. In simple terms it will delay your signal so that all the frequencies within the track are kept in phase.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump