Multibus compression - "brauerizing" in S1 - is it worth it?

[Wolfger]

A dummy Bus is a bus which is going nowhere. You are right here.
I never used a SSL console form the use of which Michael Brauer created his workflow in Pro tools.
As I understand it, on the SSL you have a routing Matrix on the top of every channel where you could route each channel to up to 64 busses with a click of the according buttons and deselect the channel going to the stereo/mixbus. You don´t have those bus routing buttons in pro tools and Studio One, so in order to recreate that workflow he is using sends instead and instead of deselecting the stereo mix button he is using a dummy bus as the output for each channel, so there are only going to the busses assigned via the sends.
In Studio One it is also not possible to send to No Output, but you can create a dummy bus in the Output settings of the Project settings by creating an output bus which is routed to no physical output.
The advantage of using sends in the DAW is, that you could send one channel to multiple busses if needed, which is not possible by what you are suggesting in your post.
A VCA is no bus, there is no sound going through a VCA. A VCA master fader is (in the analog world) a fader, which is sending control-voltage to VCA (Voltage Controlled Amplifier) elements in all assigned slave-channels. The VCA is used to control the level of the assigned channels, which then are routed to one or more busses.
If you are sure you only want to send a certain channel to exactly one bus, then yes, you get the some effect by assigning the output of that channel to the bus instead of using a send.
Sends just give more flexibility if this is needed.

 

[MC2]

In Studio One it is also not possible to send to No Output, but you can create a dummy bus in the Output settings of the Project settings by creating an output bus which is routed to no physical output.
The advantage of using sends in the DAW is, that you could send one channel to multiple busses if needed, which is not possible by what you are suggesting in your post.

Ok just a question if it is possible to Dummy Bus in the mixer somehow... hide it so that the Faderport does not “detect” it ? Because it's a shame for one fader to control “to nowhere”.
The implication would be that it is best to create 4 buses (ABCD) and to them appropriately direct SEND from the channels specific instruments, and folders can be useful to do order in the mixer to hide the source channels in the mixer and leave only ABCD.
That is, as I understand it in the final stage, after setting the mutual component levels of the A bus (and the others similarly), I'm left only with setting the pattern levels of ABC and D. Then what is the practical use of VCA control for in this case?


Ok it's just the Dummy Bus slider that bothers me in the clear view of the mixer

 

[Wolfger]

The dummy BUS is created in I/O settings of the Project settings. It is a stereo-bus which is routed nowhere

Here you can see 8 channels and four busses. the channel output is going to the dummy bus. The channels are routed to the four busses via a send. The ALL AUDIO VCA would control the level of all the channels before they go to the bus. Wether you need that or not is up to you.
What´s missing is the channels going to folder busses. The screenshot would become too big. if you use folder busses the sends to A B C D would be applied to the folder busses.

 

[Wolfger]

This is Track 1-2 and Track 3-4 put into a Bus-folder. Now Bus-folder Group 01 is sent to BUS A and Bus-folder Group 02 is sent to BUS B.
Imagine having more of these groups it would make sense to have additional VCAs to control the level of all those groups (in my example I only added VCA A and VCA B). that gives ultimate flexibility. ALL VCA can control the level of all tracks while VCA A and B control all groups they are assigned to. that´s how I think this all works and makes sense. that's what I get form the pdf description above, but I could be wrong!

 

[MC2]

Thank you. Now I understand. That is, the VCA comes in handy if I want to influence the volume of the concretes even before they hit the buses and compressors.
For the time being I will test without VCA, because it complicates my vision too much

As for the multi-mono mode, in case the compressor has only mono or stereo processing, on the channel I can split the spliter into left and right and use two instances of this compressor with the same settings?

That is, I am still left with the “calibration” of the compressor in 2x mono mode. It's a good thing that the calibration is done initially in “set and forget” mode, because the 2x mono mode, however, strongly increases the complexity of the whole thing.

I also traced where to hide the Dummy output display in the mixer. It's just a pity that you can't choose which outputs you want to see in the mixer. That it is all or nothing. Because in my setup I still use a separate stereo output for the headphone amp, so hiding the outputs and that output hides me.

 

[Wolfger]

I did not dig into the calibration process. Just for the ease of use I would try to use compressor plugins which offers dual-mono mode like the Arturia diode 609 for example. But the splitting method could work
Yes, seems there is no way of hiding individual outputs.
But you can reorder the busses in the Project I/O settings window by dragging, so the dummy-bus would be the last output.
Then drag the divider that separates the outputs from the other channels until only the phones output is visible

 

[daw stew]

Brauer doesn't use the dummy sends for the ABCD approach. They are busses which receive audio output from individual channels. Simply route drums and bass to B. Keys to A. Guitars to C. FX to D. He does have a non effected E bus which he sends to IF the combined compression feels like the transient attack has been smoothed too much

He does use the dummy output send approach with his multi vocal compressors.

 

[Wolfger]

Brauer doesn't use the dummy sends for the ABCD approach. They are busses which receive audio output from individual channels. Simply route drums and bass to B. Keys to A. Guitars to C. FX to D. He does have a non effected E bus which he sends to IF the combined compression feels like the transient attack has been smoothed too much

He does use the dummy output send approach with his multi vocal compressors.

Great, this would be even easier to setup then! I did not go through the whole pdf.

 

[daw stew]

Great, this would be even easier to setup then! I did not go through the whole pdf.

Yup, route the drums to B AND set up a send to E so that you can blend back in the original unprocessed signal.

 

[Wolfger]

Yup, route the drums to B AND set up a send to E so that you can blend back in the original unprocessed signal.

Thanx for clarifying! it´s so hard to see in those dark pro tools pictures!

 

[Dave71]

I watch once again the videos explaining Brauer's methodology. It is a bit complicated.
In Pro Tools there is a Dummy Bus send for each channel. And for a group of tracks a bus is created with a compressor embedded on the insert.

I wonder if this could be simplified on S1. For example, for a group of 5 tracks with a piano, we create a track folder and from it we create a group to which we assign Mix Bus A. And on the Bus A channel we insert a compressor.
We repeat such operation for all 4 buses. (ABCD)
Well, in general, if I understand correctly, sending a given channel to the Dummy Bus is supposed to cause that directly on the master output there is no signal from a single channel, but only from the ABCD buses?

If I am thinking wrong, how should it be correct?

Just why then the fun with the VCA buses?

I think you hit the nail on the head there. In Studio One i/o settings you can set up a dummy output, which would have the same purpose as the ProTools dummy bus. It's simply to not route the output of that channel to the main out, or any physical output. If setting this up in the i/o settings is not preferable you can also simply route to a bus channel and mute that bus channel.
However, I wonder why this routing. Why not simply route the output of the channels to the bus you want to use for it? So, the same question you have. I would think that you get the same idea that way. Just create your routing to busses when appropriate (for example drum buss, guitars, etc.) and then routing those busses to the Brauerize busses A, B, C and D. I wonder what I'm missing here. But if there's a good reason for it, there is certainly a way to achieve this easily.

I'm also a bit confused about the incorporation of VCA channels. A VCA is basically a control fader which makes connected channels move in a way to keep the balance between channels the same. Not seeing the use here and potentially it can make everything overly complicated.

Now, the initial question is "is it worth it?". Well, possibly. Try it out and see if it's for you. You can use any compressor you prefer for each group, you can use any saturation plugin on the B bus, you can use any stereo widener on the keys bus.

Another question was if you can expand the number of busses. Of course. Michael Brauer uses 4 because he likes that. And from what I understand vocals are not part of that but get their own treatment. But if you want to separate electric from acoustic guitar, or feel that a low powerchord guitar part should go to the bass and drums bus, try it all.

 

[daw stew]

I think you hit the nail on the head there. In Studio One i/o settings you can set up a dummy output, which would have the same purpose as the ProTools dummy bus. It's simply to not route the output of that channel to the main out, or any physical output. If setting this up in the i/o settings is not preferable you can also simply route to a bus channel and mute that bus channel.
However, I wonder why this routing. Why not simply route the output of the channels to the bus you want to use for it? So, the same question you have. I would think that you get the same idea that way. Just create your routing to busses when appropriate (for example drum buss, guitars, etc.) and then routing those busses to the Brauerize busses A, B, C and D. I wonder what I'm missing here. But if there's a good reason for it, there is certainly a way to achieve this easily.

I'm also a bit confused about the incorporation of VCA channels. A VCA is basically a control fader which makes connected channels move in a way to keep the balance between channels the same. Not seeing the use here and potentially it can make everything overly complicated.

Now, the initial question is "is it worth it?". Well, possibly. Try it out and see if it's for you. You can use any compressor you prefer for each group, you can use any saturation plugin on the B bus, you can use any stereo widener on the keys bus.

Another question was if you can expand the number of busses. Of course. Michael Brauer uses 4 because he likes that. And from what I understand vocals are not part of that but get their own treatment. But if you want to separate electric from acoustic guitar, or feel that a low powerchord guitar part should go to the bass and drums bus, try it all.

Just for clarity. The ABCD are busses that Michael routes his audio channels to. There are no sends and dummy outs involved. Michael has a fifth bus channel, the E bus which is unaffected which is used as a send to blend back in the clean signal.
Where he does use the dummy outs is with his vocal channels. First of all Michael splits his vocal lead into 2 channels, one for the verses and the other for choruses. The output of both these channels is set to the dummy output. On both channels Michael has 5 sends to 5 FX channels. Each channel has 1 compressor each with its own unique tone. Michael then uses the sends on the vocal channels to create a blended tone of the compressors.
Regarding the VCA channels they are used to drive the channel output into the input of thecompressors. Too much input and the compressors will sound crushed, not enough input and the compressors won't react. With a VCA it's easy to push multiple channel faders simultaneously

 

[MC2]

I'm trying to implement a signal routing scheme on the basis of analysis, and I don't quite understand what's wrong. Or maybe everything is OK

I have 8 tracks connected in a folder and for the folder I created Bus Channel for example A.
Now it's time to calibrate the compressor.
On the Bus A inserts, I inserted a sine signal generator and set it to 1kHz -18dB. Last in the chain I inserted a VU meter - in this case it indicates 0dB VU. And up to this point everything is correct.

Next, between the generator and the VU meter I insert a compressor (a standard one from Studio One).
I set: Attack 20ms, Relesase 80ms, Knee 0. Ratio 3:1
I set Threshold so that the VU meter indicates -1dB.
Then using Makeup I raise the signal on the VU to 0dB and turn off the generator.
It seems that the compressor is calibrated (?).

And now the questions:
Is this the correct way to calibrate the compressor?
Assuming that I have calibrated the compressor correctly, when playing a tracks from a particular group, should the compressor action on the bus limit the total signal level to a maximum of 0dB? Is it possible to exceed this level?
I am trying to understand the operation of the compressor in this case, but it is unclear to me.

 

[daw stew]

I'm trying to implement a signal routing scheme on the basis of analysis, and I don't quite understand what's wrong. Or maybe everything is OK

I have 8 tracks connected in a folder and for the folder I created Bus Channel for example A.
Now it's time to calibrate the compressor.
On the Bus A inserts, I inserted a sine signal generator and set it to 1kHz -18dB. Last in the chain I inserted a VU meter - in this case it indicates 0dB VU. And up to this point everything is correct.

Next, between the generator and the VU meter I insert a compressor (a standard one from Studio One).
I set: Attack 20ms, Relesase 80ms, Knee 0. Ratio 3:1
I set Threshold so that the VU meter indicates -1dB.
Then using Makeup I raise the signal on the VU to 0dB and turn off the generator.
It seems that the compressor is calibrated (?).

And now the questions:
Is this the correct way to calibrate the compressor?
Assuming that I have calibrated the compressor correctly, when playing a tracks from a particular group, should the compressor action on the bus limit the total signal level to a maximum of 0dB? Is it possible to exceed this level?
I am trying to understand the operation of the compressor in this case, but it is unclear to me.

Hi, yes that's the right way to calibrate a compressor, basically the ABCD bus compressors are doing nothing more than 1db of compression. Very light compression The output of the ABCD buses goes into his stereo bus. The purpose of the ABCD is to take the edge off all instrument groups so that they aren't hitting the stereo buss as hard. Sort of a buffer.
A note on the A bus calibration. Michael Brauer has a compressor followed by an EQ. In the case of the A bus the compressor is doing 1db of compression but the EQ is bringing the level back up to -18db on the meter.

 

[MC2]

Hi, yes that's the right way to calibrate a compressor, basically the ABCD bus compressors are doing nothing more than 1db of compression. Very light compression The output of the ABCD buses goes into his stereo bus. The purpose of the ABCD is to take the edge off all instrument groups so that they aren't hitting the stereo buss as hard. Sort of a buffer.
A note on the A bus calibration. Michael Brauer has a compressor followed by an EQ. In the case of the A bus the compressor is doing 1db of compression but the EQ is bringing the level back up to -18db on the meter.

That is, if I understand correctly, the compressor on the bus only “smooths” the peaks of the signal, introduces a slight compression well and “coloration” . That is, still if I introduce too much signal I can exceed 0dB on the total quite a lot?
This puzzled me because after plugging in a compressor configured this way, I noticed a very slight change in the sound.
Well, and I understand that the end result in this situation strongly depends on what compressor I use. So, I still need to test on others

So such a mix actually still works “from the detail to the general”. First I mix all the elements of e.g. drums and then with one track I release them as one of the 4 components of the “final mix”.

 

[SwitchBack]

New to this technique but it mainly seems to do two things:

• Provide a minimal amount of glue between instruments of similar ilk
• Provide a visual indicator that something jumps out and needs to be addressed

In that sense it reminds me of Dave Rat’s strategy for mixing live shows, also in the way VCAs are used. If the second point is more important than the first then you need inconspicuous compressors, which is where that ‘high end’ requirement comes in…

 

[daw stew]

Another approach that I have seen that does the same thing is to add a clipper to individual tracks. They reduce transients without too much impact to the sound. Transient reduction then lessens the impact of the tracks going into your 2 bus limiter meaning it's not working as hard

 

[lounlyy]

I recently found a multi-hour interview with MB on Puremix, where he explains the what, the why, and the how. He also explained how he made the transition from hardware to software. So, he's already moved from classic hardware to software solutions in Pro Tools. Unfortunately, to fully understand it, you need to know Pro Tools and have an ear like MB's. Sadly, not all the nuances are audible for technical reasons, or... I simply can't hear them.
However, he describes very well his approach to mixing and selecting the plugin palette that best suits his needs. In fact, he himself comments in the interview that it used to be easier because there was a limited selection of hardware, so he used what was available on the market, and now there are many more plugins that perform similar functions.
So I guess the only thing left to do is to understand Brauer's signal routing, try to transfer it to S1 (which isn't so obvious, because I have the impression that S1 has less signal routing capabilities than Pro Tools) and choose your plug-ins based on that, and treat the interview with him as a guide in your search for your own sound.

Hi! I have the Pro Tools template — I found it on PureMix, and it’s approved by Michael Brauer.
Maybe someone could design a version of the template for Studio One, using the original Pro Tools one as a reference.
Any updates? I’m really interested in having a template we can share for free with everyone!

 

[MC2]

I think that here you would probably have to approach the entire saber scheme. Unfortunately, I am convinced that not every solution can be moved entirely between various DAWs. The drawing would be a good starting point for attempts to implement on various platforms. The more that there are also equipment such as Behringer Wing with the emulation of many hardware Brauer solutions. You can be tempted to implement the entire algorithm on Wing.

 

[lokeyfly]

I did an extensive demo of Pro Tools in the last month and as I see it VCAs in Pro Tools work exactly like in Studio One.

I agree and come from PT, and others. For the bulk of routing, there's effectively little difference

The, for lack of a better description "Braurizing" can be accomplished creating four, or more busses until the cows come home in Studio One. So A,B, C, & D busses with particular plugin effects (racks, I'm not sure), and various effect groupings for mix continuity, or isolation are really rather obvious. Several comps chained can certainly put less strain on the mix, or any number of a few thousand variables depending on the situation. The release, the ratios, what they're actually contributing to, etc. As to what content? Lol. Please.

In fairness, buss groupings work well for the particular song(s) they'd require. I'm never really sure why anyone on YT (and I've watched just a few) chase braurizing, only to play the end result of what sounds like a garage band all playing at the same time, and really amounts to something that seems...... well....... wrong. The video blogger seems to be more involved in the GAS, or imitating the same peeing duration of Michael Braur, than furnishing a good mix.

Why not take the essence of creating a few busses and locating what a specific song can benefit from. Some songs will, some wont, and most certainly (unless the artist doesn't stray much from their material) differ.