Busses - mixing down - best approach

- ask away
Post Reply
steevio
mnml maxi
mnml maxi
Posts: 3495
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 12:18 pm
Location: wales UK
Contact:

Post by steevio »

swarlied wrote:@kdgh

i realy enjoyed the soundcloud links you have posted is this sound created with different compression on low-, mid-, high-busses?

@steevio
as a simple example i cross frequency modulate the fundamantal waves of my percussion sounds, it ties them together in ways which are impossible by any other method,
I dont know what you mean, i maybe also lack understanding of cross-frequency modulation. would you mind explainig this a little bit better or would you mind to post us some example of your drums?
its nothing complicated, if you are creating your percussion sounds in synthesizers, you can use the fundamental wave of one percussion sound to frequency modulate the fundamental wave of another, and of course you can do this bi-directionally, so its possible to get allsorts of timbral effects just using two waves to start with.
i do this with my modular, but i'm sure its possible with other types of synth.
i just mentioned it as one way to get coherence amongst your drums, but there a lots of other possibilities.
i'm in the middle of recording alot of material to be released in the summer, so rather than post bits and pieces here, i'd rather wait till it all comes out.
kdgh
mnml mmbr
mnml mmbr
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:51 pm

Post by kdgh »

swarlied wrote:@kdgh

i realy enjoyed the soundcloud links you have posted is this sound created with different compression on low-, mid-, high-busses?

@steevio
as a simple example i cross frequency modulate the fundamantal waves of my percussion sounds, it ties them together in ways which are impossible by any other method,
I dont know what you mean, i maybe also lack understanding of cross-frequency modulation. would you mind explainig this a little bit better or would you mind to post us some example of your drums?
thank you and yes some of made in this way, tho not everything of course. We've a big love for tape saturation. That also has a certain 'glue'. Just send some saturation on certain elements you want to give some 'crunch'. Besides lot's of the glueing is also about leveling and let we don't forget reverb. Use verbs as a mixing tool instead of a fx itself. Make a room, plate and hall and send this to certain groups. Just for the experience not to hear it clearly. It gives the elements depth and width.
steevio
mnml maxi
mnml maxi
Posts: 3495
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 12:18 pm
Location: wales UK
Contact:

Post by steevio »

kdgh wrote: Besides lot's of the glueing is also about leveling and let we don't forget reverb. Use verbs as a mixing tool instead of a fx itself. Make a room, plate and hall and send this to certain groups. Just for the experience not to hear it clearly. It gives the elements depth and width.
i totally agree,

i remember my first recording session in a real studio with my band, and the engineer told me that you should only notice reverb when you take it away.

that has always stuck with me, i put the smallest amount possible of the same reverb on most of the sounds, (but not all) so that you can't tell there is any there till you mute it out. this brings the whole mix into one performance in one space, but it has to be really subtle or it doesnt work and muddies up the mix.

there are so many ways to glue a mix together.
mrboombastic
mnml newbie
mnml newbie
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 4:33 pm

Post by mrboombastic »

Big thanks again all for the replies. I realise there is no perfect solution and method for mixing and bussing etc but its been great to get a few tips on how i could go about it.

Its amazing really, reading around seeing the different approaches people have and it very true. There is not set method. I think i really just have to take a step back and try not to over-think things as i could pretty much go crazy reading all the hundreds of different approaches and there pro's and cons.

I cant remember which producer it was i watched the other day in the studio. I think it was Umek. He basically said, regarding how he groups and compresses things, "its not rocket science, if it sounds good, it is good" :)
kdgh
mnml mmbr
mnml mmbr
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:51 pm

Post by kdgh »

steevio wrote:
kdgh wrote: Besides lot's of the glueing is also about leveling and let we don't forget reverb. Use verbs as a mixing tool instead of a fx itself. Make a room, plate and hall and send this to certain groups. Just for the experience not to hear it clearly. It gives the elements depth and width.
i totally agree,

i remember my first recording session in a real studio with my band, and the engineer told me that you should only notice reverb when you take it away.

that has always stuck with me, i put the smallest amount possible of the same reverb on most of the sounds, (but not all) so that you can't tell there is any there till you mute it out. this brings the whole mix into one performance in one space, but it has to be really subtle or it doesnt work and muddies up the mix.

there are so many ways to glue a mix together.
this! Tho i'm not really a person who likes his whole mix in a certain verb. It's about contrast. If you want a cowbell in the face, try send a bit plate to the cowbell... A short verb reminds you of a small room, so you brain will think it's pretty close. You can't be far away in a small room...
AK
mnml maxi
mnml maxi
Posts: 1973
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:01 pm
Location: Worcestershire

Post by AK »

I quite like that myself. Just giving the whole mix a tiny amount of reverb pulls it away from a 2 dimensional thing and can gel everything. Im talking an amount you wouldnt really notice though. I hate the swamped reverb mix. Its been used for donkeys years. Matter of choice obviously.
steevio
mnml maxi
mnml maxi
Posts: 3495
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 12:18 pm
Location: wales UK
Contact:

Post by steevio »

kdgh wrote:
steevio wrote:
kdgh wrote: Besides lot's of the glueing is also about leveling and let we don't forget reverb. Use verbs as a mixing tool instead of a fx itself. Make a room, plate and hall and send this to certain groups. Just for the experience not to hear it clearly. It gives the elements depth and width.
i totally agree,

i remember my first recording session in a real studio with my band, and the engineer told me that you should only notice reverb when you take it away.

that has always stuck with me, i put the smallest amount possible of the same reverb on most of the sounds, (but not all) so that you can't tell there is any there till you mute it out. this brings the whole mix into one performance in one space, but it has to be really subtle or it doesnt work and muddies up the mix.

there are so many ways to glue a mix together.
this! Tho i'm not really a person who likes his whole mix in a certain verb. It's about contrast. If you want a cowbell in the face, try send a bit plate to the cowbell... A short verb reminds you of a small room, so you brain will think it's pretty close. You can't be far away in a small room...
yes mate, i'm not talking about individual reverbs on different sounds, i always use different short reverbs on percussion sounds, i'm talking about a transparent reverb that you dont actually notice at all, which acts as a glue for the main components in the mix. it has to be very very subtle, if you can hear it as reverb, its too high in the mix.
kdgh
mnml mmbr
mnml mmbr
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:51 pm

Post by kdgh »

wasn't trying to offense you, just tried to give the topic some extra info haha;)
Post Reply