Meet Michael Brauer

A few days ago I was introduced to the personal website for Michael Brauer.  I’m a big fan of his mixes – maybe you’ve heard a few:  Coldplay “Viva La Vida” & “Parachutes”, John Mayer “Continuum”, The Fray, Gavin Degraw, Ben Folds, & Matt Kearney.  It’s always especially interesting to find a well developed personal website for an engineer who’s work I enjoy.  Michael’s site has a rich Q&A/FAQ section and reprints of various articles featuring his work.  Definitely some good reads here.

Below are a few highlights of things in the Q&A section that struck a chord with me.

———————————-

Could you speak to the issue of how you achieve movement in a mix (or your philosophy about movement in a mix)? I read in one of your other posts of how you rode a pad in one of the Coldplay mixes. Do you generally ride all instruments/sources…or are there some sources that remain rather static and others source that your regularly “move”? If you can’t give a general opinion, perhaps you can comment on your philosophy in mixing with movement in mind. With the large amout of dynamics processing that today’s mixes go through, how important is movement in a mix when the song is going to get pulverized to 5 – 6 dB of dynamic range anyway?

The song will dictate everything that needs to happen. Not gear, not technique, not the “go to” button. It’s about the song and nothing but the song.

Dynamics are going to play a major role in giving the chorus the payoff it needs. I’m not necessarily referring to riding the stereo track up. I mean internal rides going into the chorus like riding the drums up on the last bar or riding up the first chord of the guitars. These are just tiny basic examples to get you started.

I’m riding a whole lotta faders during the course of a mix. I’m riding the vocal to drive the song, riding the bass, toms, cymbals…well pretty much anything that helps make the song come alive. I’m making the mix as animated as possible to get the message of the song across to the listener. Imagine you’re watching an action cartoon and that will be a good starting point for how dynamics work.

Of course, not all songs are going ballistic. I probably do more rides on a ballad than I might on a rocker. It’s the accumulation of many subtle rides that add up to an emotional mix. You can probably set a good level of a compressed string section in a chorus and just let it rip. I prefer to do internal rides within those strings and overall small crescendos of the group to accentuate the passage. I may very well compress them, but that may not be enough to do the section justice. The point is to add movement to the song in order to make it seem to come alive. You’ve got to ask yourself one question, “Do I feel lucky?, Well do ya punk?”…oops sorry, I mean, What rides can help a great hook?…punk.

There are no set rules for what stays static or doesn’t because every song is different, the recording is different, the parts are different, basically, everything is different. The point is to use dynamics to bring out the best a song has to offer. What can be done to make the story and the hook of a song burn into your brain forever.

Rides are an essential part of mixing a song to its full potential regardless of the amount of compression the mix is going to get hit with by the time it goes to radio. An emotional mix will help the song survive the squash. It’s all about the song. Repeat after me, it’s all about the song.

In your opinion, what do you think gives a snare drum stroke the ultimate catchy sound in a mix?

Thats a tough one to answer because there are so many variables.

For me every song is different. I decide early on how the snare should be placed and how important it is to a song. If the recorded snare doesn’t sound good in the the track I add one or a combination of samples to get the sound I’m looking for. I rarely replace the source kick or snare.

I like the snare to give the song’s midrange a brightness without interfering with the vocal. How bombastic, fat, funky, snappy, etc is determined by the style of music I’m mixing. If it’s funk, I’m not gonna give it a rock feel…unless it works. It’s always a work in progress.

The snare has over the years defined in what time period the song was released. Some snare sounds had a very short shelf life and dates a song so terribly that it’s hard to listen to. I decided many years ago to come up with snare sounds that would withstand the test of time. Many times, it’s the snare that gives the song it’s unique hit quality. Within my discography, Coldplay’s “Yellow” is probably a good example.

In general, i’m changing my snare sound every six months. As soon as I find one that is catchy, I drop it because I don’t want two different artists to share the same sound. It’s an easy temptation to just repeat the same snare sound but I think that’s lazy and eventually people would get bored by it, not to mention it gives every artist the same generic sound. That’s not the reason why artists want me mixing their record. It’s harder to accomplish but so what, it’s not as if I’ve got anything else to do.

Do you like the artist being present at the mixing session?

Hello? I’m not the artist, I’m just the mixer. It’s their vision, not mine that I want to mix. If the vision is unclear on a particular song, I can help.

The band has spent months making their record. They’ve been part of every decision, change, fight, and they’ve finally gotten their vision recorded and documented. The rough mixes are feeling great. And now for the most important part of the recording process, they aren’t allowed at the mix? Wrong, I’m not interested in mixing an album for myself. I want to know about each song including the story, the vision, the likes and dislikes of the rough mix, tracks that should be left off or changed, etc. For a new band it’s even more crucial because I want to help set up a sonic template that is unique to them that also sets them apart from other bands.

I make it very clear to the record company that if the band’s visionary or someone they completely trust to represent them isn’t at the mix, I’m not interested in mixing the record. There are very few exceptions to this rule. Sometimes the reasoning behind a record company’s request of “no artist attendance” may be valid, but most of the time I don’t buy it. I get the “they don’t know what they want”, “They’re too young to have a clue about the mixing process”, “they are such a pain in the ass that they’ll screw up the mixes”, “we don’t have the budget” and “they’re on tour.” In my mind, these reasons don’t qualify for them being excluded from the mix.

If the band agrees the producer or A&R has a better idea what is best for the band, then they should attend the session. If it’s a money issue, I can set up live Ednet sessions. The artist can be at a studio in London or LA and listen back to the mix in real time using the same speakers I’m monitoring. They can make comments via a talkback and they have visual via ichat . It works like a charm. I would prefer them to be in the same room, but this is a great alternative. And finally, I’m from NYC, nobody is going to want to be a pain in the ass for very long on my session.

It comes down to this: it’s their record, not mine. I have years of experience at their disposal. I have a short time to make their songs come to life and they have a lifetime to live with it.