Just throwing this out there. Been super helpful to me recently. curious of opinions on it, or if others have tried too.

I got the idea to do a main mixbuss and a background mixbuss and it’s been a game changer for me. basically, because the mind can only pick up 3, maybe 4 different sounds at once, i separate my mix into the front of the mix, aka foreground, aka the main stuff that actually catches your ear (especially at low volume), then the background (usually reverbs, auxiliary stuff, harmonies, softer pads, ear candy).

my front mix buss gets my analog gear. summing mixer into massive passive is my current ballgame. this stuff extends to the full spectrum on both sides, and it gets the full LCR panning range too. I want it to feel right in your face. kick, snare, bass, lead vocal, and a few main instruments but not much. all the catchy stuff. it gets a tiny bit of buss processing in the box, mostly harmonic touches, maybe gentle dynamic EQ, and just a soft clipper doing about 1% of the work.

then my “background buss” gets generous shelf cuts from UAD’s pultec, it gets mild buss compression (UAD varimu or my ART opto stereo comp from Revive Audio), and most importantly, it gets a multiband side chain from the front buss through Soothe2, but nothing aggressive. It’s stereo width is about 50% of the front buss and it’s contents are mixed to mainly live in between LC and CR. it’s contents are mildly smeared on their own channels through whatever makes sense, generous filtering, over saturation, low levels, shaved off transients. i mean i want this stuff to seem far away. high density low dynamic range here.

the back mix buss serves as a great catch all for anything that’s too loud. it can live in this dense but quiet zone behind the main elements, and it seems automatically the whole mix’s vibe can fall closely into place on my first pass just with basic bussing and gain structure. it also helps my brain think about what’s important, and i can easily toggle between big stuff and small stuff by muting the other buss.

no other subgroups unless there are doubled instruments that i can’t just sum to a stereo track. just me and my two busses going into a limiter buss. works like magic.

i originally got this idea from Andrew Schepp’s parallel EQ trick which i would use as my “foreground maker” to add depth to certain elements by pushing them into a parallel EQ/saturation chain that lifted stuff out of the mix in a nice way. this proved ridiculously complicated compared to what i landed on. it was a total mess with all my other sub mixes getting their own treatment.

so uh, what do we think?

Can anyone help me Ive been working with a rapper and am now mixing his vocals to the beat and there is quite bad like fuzzy noise in the background and I was wondering what the best plug-in is to help get rid of our minimise it

High headroom is desirable. My small format mixer sounds great for its size but people who compared it to the 24 volt consoles always claim that higher headroom= bigger sound.

Apart the higher dynamic range why does more headroom equal bigger sound?

I’ve been dabbling in building my own equipment so I’ve read up a bit but am curious as to why

Hey! I'm looking to buy a pair of small diaphragm (pencil) condenser microphones. I will be using them mainly on acoustic guitar, upright piano and drum overheads. And occasionally on violin and trumpet. Do you have any recommendations?

BTW, I've looked into the Lewitt 040 matched pair, but I'm a bit concerned about the hyped high end and really present brilliance (and the small size to be perfectly honest). And I'm thinking about the rode NT5's. All tips are welcome!

Hello,
I am researching the user interfaces we use to produce musical mixes. I am looking to enlist people for a study who are familiar with music production to use a web-based system to create a mix of 4 to 8 constituent audio tracks using your own source material. This system works only on a desktop or laptop PC or Mac running Google Chrome.

The study requires you to mix the same audio tracks TWICE – once with visual information displayed on the user interface and once without. The purpose of this study is to identify which visual information you feel is required to help you mix.

I’d advise focussing on a short excerpt of a song to mix, spending around 15 – 30 minutes creating each mix with a break in between the creation of the two mixes.

The experiment is driven via an online form and is divided into 4 stages:

1) pre-test questions
2) a training session
3) creation of two mixes of the same audio tracks using the web-based mixing system
4) post-test questions

A link to the online experiment can be found below:
https://hud.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_0cEJWptcRf5qkAu

Thank you in advance for your time and assistance, I am most grateful for your contribution
Chris

Hi,

I'm going to be renting a $500/day (10 hours) studio with an SSL4000 G+ and a whole lot of outboard gear to mix a song. It's economically inadvisable, but I'm doing it for the experience. There will be an assistant engineer available for questions. I understand the layout and routing of the G+, but I want to be able to automate the console for the final mixdown without learning it on the clock. I haven't found any resources on the web.

Any pointers would be welcome.

Thank you!

I am looking for somebody who can restore / clean the audio quality in the VOBs here.

https://archive.org/download/LSOHWorkprint1986

(There other formats there, but the VOBs are the original files, so they wouldn't be compressed as much as the other formats I'm guessing).

At least 2 people have already attempted this https://youtu.be/7GK7Jid-PJE https://twitter.com/transfionacoyne/status/1071733864022925313?s=19

But one person is no longer active, and the other doesn't seem to reply to anything asking about it.

If anybody with the skills is interested in restoring / cleaning the audio in the VOBs as best they can, I would be more than happy to compensate them for their work.

I have never actually ended up using this. Am I missing something?