01-02-2017, 01:20 PM
(30-01-2017, 07:14 PM)RoyMatthews Wrote: I don't remember the bass tracks on this one. I will say I've had a lot of success with Michael Brauer's* technique of splitting the bass and having an "Anchor" channel and a definition channel and blending the two. I take it a few steps farther where the Anchor channel is almost all low end, anywhere from 150hz on down to 100 or 90 and the definition track is filtered at about 250hz on up. And even though they have their own compression I'll send them to another bus and do come compression and maybe some eq. Most of the time the bass isn't eq'ed it's just the blend of two.
*From Brauer's Q&A
"I've run into that problem many times. Sucks doesn't it? This is how I deal with it; I always bring the bass amp and direct on two channels, float them to two busses and bring the two busses back on two channels. One channel has a 747 across it and the other has a dbx on it. The function of the 747 is to be the anchor and hold down the bottom end. I'll eq and compress it so that it sounds warm and fat, no top. I take the dbx and squeeze the tits out of it. I'll eq out (sharp Q) any notes that jump out and I'll take out a lot of the bottom. So now I have my bottom end from the 747 and my mid range and clarity from the dbx. Then I put a crank call in to the guy that recorded it and I'm ready to mix."
Thanks for Sharing this.
Something that I will definitely explore.
I must admit, I haven't spent much time exploring the pro's of the industry nor their signature techniques. I need to be more open in this regard as I move forward.
As it is I'm one of those blokes that spends all day going around in circles trying all sorts of crazy moves only to find 1dB up on the fader was all that was needed. Anyway I'm learning heaps and sometimes discover crazy tricks that become part of my work flow moving forward.
Dave