October 14, 2025 • 17 mins
What if a better‑translating mix starts before you touch a single channel plugin? I put top‑down mixing under the microscope and share a candid, first‑hand evaluation: what worked, what didn’t, and how a few smart moves on the mix bus reshaped the entire project in less time and with fewer plugins. Rather than a tutorial, this is a field report packed with practical takeaways you can try on your next session.
I begin by setting a clear vision using references—one in the same key for tonal and energy alignment—and a bounced static mix for instant AB checks. From there, we build a lean, disciplined master bus chain: gentle resonance control, broad‑stroke EQ shelves, an SSL‑style bus compressor, and subtle tape saturation. Those small, wide moves made a big difference early, tightening low‑end focus and smoothing top‑end glare while preserving macro and microdynamics. With the canvas set, we move through subgroups—kick and bass, drums, synths, vocals, FX—pushing fixes upstream and only dropping to track level for surgical EQ where it truly matters.
Not everything got faster. Saving time on tone and dynamics meant time‑based effects arrived later, and finding the right reverb balance took more iteration than usual—proof that arrangement and spatial design can complicate a top‑down flow. Still, automation needs dropped thanks to better macro balance, CPU use fell with fewer chains, and translation improved across volumes. You’ll hear why starting at the mix bus can prevent “getting stuck in the weeds,” how to pick effective reference tracks, and when to abandon restraint for a precise channel tweak.
Suppose you’re curious about master bus processing, top‑down mixing, and faster decision‑making without sacrificing quality. In that case, this session offers a straight‑talk guide to trying it responsibly on your own productions before rolling it out for clients. Listen, steal the framework, then run your own experiment—and tell me what you discover.
Links mentioned in this episode:
Listen to Narcissist
THE UNSEEN DANGERS OF TOP-DOWN MIXING
TOP DOWN MIXING - the SECRET SAUCE
Why Top-Down Mixing is the GOAT
Top-Down Mixing: The Secret To Better FASTER Mixes?
Ways to connect with Marc:
Radio-ready mixes start here - get the FREE weekly tips
Book your FREE Music Breakthrough Strategy Call
Follow Marc's Socials:
Instagram | YouTube | Synth Music Mastering
Thanks for listening!!
Try Riverside for FREE
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Marc Matthews (00:00):
What if I told you that the secret to a
balanced mix that translatesacross all systems starts long
before you do any processing ofindividual tracks?
I'm pulling back the curtain onmy very first top-down mix
evaluation and answering thequestion: is top-down mixing for
me?
You're listening to the Insidethe Mix podcast with your host,
(00:22):
Mark Matthews.
Welcome to Inside the Mix, yourgo-to podcast for music
creation and production.
Whether you're crafting yourfirst track or refining your
mixing skills, join me each weekfor expert interviews,
practical tutorials, andinsights to help you level up
your music and smash it in themusic industry.
Let's dive in.
(00:43):
Hello folks, and welcome toInside the Mix and a big welcome
if you are a new listener.
So, in this episode, as Imentioned in the introduction
there, I'm going through theevaluation of my first top-down
mixing session.
Now, in my 10 plus years ofmusic production in various
guises, this is the first timethat I've ever done top-down
mixing, and I was inspired to dothis after my conversations
(01:06):
with Brian Skeele in episode 215and Nate Kelms in episode 197,
both of the Inside the Mixpodcast.
So do go check those episodesout where we drill down a bit
deeper into the top-down mixingprocess.
So a quick disclaimer on thisepisode: this isn't me educating
you on how to use the top-downmixing process or go through a
top-down mix.
(01:27):
This is just my thoughts andopinions on what I experienced
going through this process forthe first time.
When learning something new, Igenerally go through my due
diligence process.
So obviously, I had thoseconversations with uh Nate Helns
and Brian Skill, but I also didsome research of my own and
found some really goodinstructional videos on YouTube.
And I'll put a link to thosevideos in the episode
(01:49):
description.
So if you want a breakdown or aplay-by-play of how to go
through the top-down mixingprocess, I've linked, or rather,
I put some links in the episodedescription that you can use to
uh to educate yourselves, muchlike I did.
So some inspiration for you,and you'll find that in the
episode description.
So the core philosophy oftop-down mixing or master bus
(02:10):
processing, as some do call it,is to start at the mix bus or
the master bus, whichever,whichever sort of version you
want to use of that of thatname.
And basically, you're listeningto the mix as a whole, as
really you should do any when itwhen it comes to mixing, but
you're not focusing on the finerdetails.
So you can think of it thisway: the what the way I did it
and the way I sort of got fromthe from the research I went
(02:32):
through was you've got sort ofbus compression, you've got EQ,
maybe maybe some saturation aswell.
And that's pretty much what Idid.
But what I found were thesebroad strokes worked really well
in sort of like low and highshelves, and then if I wanted to
boost something in the in themid-range, quite wide cues, but
at the same time, I wasn't goingtoo crazy with my with my game,
(02:54):
with the boosts that I wasusing, or the cuts as well, to
be honest.
Can't remember if I did anycuts.
I may have done.
Um possibly.
But anyway, what I was findingwas I was just making these
subtle changes, but it washaving a huge impact on the
overall sound of the mix.
And I mean, to cut a long storyshort, what I found was when it
actually came to the fullmixing process, it was
(03:15):
significantly shorter in termsof time and effort, really, and
also in CPU processing, becauseI found I was using fewer
plugins because I was doing itfrom the top down, I was
starting at the mix bus, then mygroups, then my individual
tracks.
When I did get down to theindividual tracks, I was finding
that I might have just put someEQ on there and then I might
(03:36):
have done a low shelf on a vocalor a high pass on a vocal or
something like that.
Now there is one point thatneeds to be made with regards to
this, I think, and this is mypersonal opinion.
All of this is my opinion, bythe way, folks.
So it's um you can sort of takeit or leave it if you will.
But basically, you need tostart with a good static mix.
If you don't have a good staticmix and arrangement, to be
(03:58):
honest, obviously uh a good mixis underpinned by a good
arrangement, then you arestarting on the back foot.
So you've got to have a goodstatic mix and a good
arrangement before you eventhink of going to that, sort of
starting at the top and workingyour way down with this mixing
process.
And uh one tip I did get fromone of these videos in
particular was to bounce thestatic mix and then re-import it
(04:19):
as a reference so you canquickly A B between what you're
doing with your top-down mix andyour static mix and see what
changes you're making andwhether you're making the right
movements, the right moves,let's say.
I'm gonna quickly go throughthe process I went through when
it came to my my top-down mixfor the first time.
So I've got my notes to myright here.
So I've got initial listeningand vision setting.
(04:41):
So I wanted to ascertain whatthe song was trying to be.
I knew the genre and I knew theknew the mood and the core
elements, but this is reallywhere a reference track helped
me, a reference track, sorry,helped me.
Obviously, I've got my staticmix reference, but I always use
another reference.
Um, I'm always inspired byanother song, to be honest.
When it when it comes to makingor creating my own music, I
(05:04):
always use a song as uh as areference in terms of the
production, the arrangement, andthe mix and the master.
And what I really found helpfulhere in particular was a song
in the same key.
So I could make movementsknowing that this is a
commercial, commerciallysuccessful song with a very good
mix master, and I want to sortof emulate what's going on
(05:25):
there.
And then air quotes, I wantedto identify my north star, which
was kind of like the focalpoint of the song.
So using the reference trackagain, I identified okay, well,
I really want the bass to pushforward the track.
I want the bass to be really umprominent, as bass should be.
I mean, I love bass, I love aprominent bass, and you'll find
(05:46):
that in my productions.
But I really wanted the bass todrive the song forward and then
the vocal.
For me, it was about bass andvocal in this particular.
I will play it at the end, I'lldo an A-B so you can hear the
difference between the staticmix and sort of my my third and
final mix.
But yeah, I I identified that Ireally wanted the bass and the
and the vocal to be prominent inthis particular production from
(06:08):
my reference track.
So having identified thedirection I want to take the
mix, I then moved on to actuallystarting the top-down mixing
process.
And on that mix bus, it reallyis.
I think I started with Soothe2, just tickling some resonant
frequencies, set at about 25% tobe honest, in terms of wet and
dry.
Then some EQ, some broadstrokes with some with EQ, and
then some bus compression usingthe Waves SSL bus compressor,
(06:32):
which I absolutely love by theway.
I think I've used it on everyproduction that I've done since
I can remember, to be honest.
And then I used the slatedigital tape emulation.
I can't remember what it'scalled.
Or well, when we go over to theproject in a minute, I'll be
able to name it in particular.
Um, and that's what my mixedbus looked like.
What I found was when I A-B'dmy top-down mix bus to the
(06:56):
reference track, the thedifference was quite stark, to
be honest, even with just subtlemovements, which I think was
was when the pennies sort ofdropped a bit in terms of oh, I
can okay, I can see how I couldachieve high-quality mixes,
possibly a lot quicker.
Uh, and this was before I'deven moved on to the subgroups.
So having done the mix bus, Iwas happy with the mix bus, I
(07:19):
then moved on to the subgroups.
So I've I've groupedinstruments in terms of drums,
synths, vocals, FX, somesamples, and I think I did a
kick and bus um stack as well.
And then I treated thoseindividually.
And then I moved on to theindividual tracks.
What I did find, and when I wasdoing my doing performing my
due diligence in my research,it's important just because
(07:42):
you're doing the top-down andyou are yeah, you've got that
top-down view, and you're goingfrom the mixed bus to the
groups, do not uh discount goingin and performing some
processing on the individualtracks themselves.
Just because you're doing thetop-down doesn't mean you cannot
do the individual tracks.
You do need to pay attention tothose as well.
(08:02):
But on the flip side of that,what I did find was when I did
do any processing on individualtracks, and I think I mentioned
this earlier in this episode, itwas pretty much just EQ, to be
honest, if I remember rightly.
It was just EQ.
Whereas before, I'd have uhvocal chains, for example, or
something along those lines.
It was pretty much just EQ, andmaybe some creative effects if
(08:24):
I'm doing some side chaining orsomething along those lines.
So having gone through the mixbus, the groups, paid attention
to the individual tracks aswell, remember that's important.
I then moved on to time-basedprocessing, and this is where
it's different to what I wouldusually do, because in my
bottom-up mixing approach, whichis what I've done since day dot
really, I would do the drums,well, mainly kick and bass, and
(08:47):
then vocal.
And in when I do the vocal,that's also when I introduce
time-based processing, because Ilike to get the vocal sitting
where I want it to be, becauseit's the focal point for me in
the mix.
Um, if it's a vocal-led mix,for example.
So I usually introducetime-based processing like
delay, reverb, and chorussooner.
However, in the top-down mixingapproach, I introduced it
(09:10):
later.
And what I did find was it tookme a bit longer, and it could
be to do with the arrangement,it could be to do with the
track, to be honest.
But I did find it took melonger to find the point whereby
I was happy, and I thought thetime-based processing processing
was conducive, conducive to themix.
(09:31):
It did take me longer.
I was just I struggled a bit toget the reverb to sit where I
wanted it to sit.
And again, it could be becauseof the arrangement, it could be
because of the track, but inthis instance, that's what I
found.
Usually it's a lot quicker forme.
And when I go through thisprocess again, maybe two or
three times, I'll be able tomake an informed decision
whether or not whether or notthat's the case.
Because it could be just thismix.
(09:52):
And then I moved on toautomation, and I moved on to
automation at the same time Iusually would.
I get a nice mix, sort of satwhere I want it to be, and then
I use automation just to movethings around, add some
interest, bring things in andout where where needed.
Um, notably, really, what Ifound was I probably used less
automation than I usually would.
Now, in particular with thisarrangement, I think there's
(10:14):
less instrumentation compared toother songs.
So that could be the reasonwhy.
But I found I used lessautomation, which was quite
interesting.
Again, until I've done this twoor three more times, possibly
maybe even five times, I'll beable to make an informed
decision on whether or not,okay, I can see now, in general,
with this approach, I use lessautomation.
But that I could be totallywrong, to be honest.
(10:35):
Well, I might do five moremixes and think I do I need to
use more.
Who knows?
Uh, if you know, let me know.
And then I moved on to loudnessand translation.
So A being it with thereference track, with my static
mix as well, making sure I washappy with the overall tonal
balance and just the overallsort of loudness of the track
and the macro and microdynamicsof the track as well, of the mix
(10:56):
rather, before then moving onto the mastering phase, which I
haven't got to yet with thisparticular track.
It's also important to notethat I did this over multiple
sessions.
I'd always come back with afresh set of ears, listening at
high and low volume, just so Ican make those finer critical
adjustments that I need to.
So before we wrap up thisepisode and my thoughts and
evaluations on the top-downmixing process, let's quickly
(11:19):
dive into logic and have a havea look at what I did.
Just an overview, if you will.
Uh, so you can see here here'sthe I say see here, if you're
listening to this, I'll describeit to you.
Well, we've got my references.
So I've got my uh mynarcissist.
This is the track.
So just to throw this out thereas well, folks, I haven't
trialed this on a client'sproject.
I did it on my own project.
So I'll do this on my ownprojects first before I'm
(11:39):
totally happy to sort of releaseit into the wild if it's the
technique I'm gonna use.
So I've got my reference, mystatic mix.
And then I've got my reference,which is in the same key in
this instance.
I'm not gonna play it so Idon't get stung by YouTube with
a copyright claim.
And I've got another reference,which was my arrangement
reference, which is a CalvinHarris tune called Blessings.
(12:00):
I think the other one's CalvinHarris as well, featuring Neo,
which is my reference in thesame key.
So I've got two referencesthere.
Well, I've got two referencesplus my static mix.
So technically, I've got threereferences, but two sort of
commercial release references.
And I've got my groups.
I've got kick and bass, drums,tops, uplifters, synths,
samples, effects, and vocal.
So those are my groups that Ihave.
(12:21):
And then if we go over to themix bus, on the mix bus, I've
got oh, I was right, my mymemory was right.
I've got Soothe 2.
Uh, I've got this.
There's a nice preset on herewhich I which I tweak called
Kiss in the Mix, which is quitenice on Soothe 2.
Um, Infinity EQ, as you can seehere, some very subtle but
yeah, sort of wide EQ ummovements, Q movements for these
(12:46):
EQ movements.
And then I've got the SSL buscompressor.
Compressor.
Compressor.
God, put my teeth back in.
The SSL bus compressor, which Ilove.
And uh you can see I've gotthat going on here.
Four to one ratio, very slowattack, um, moderately fast
release for this.
And then I've got the virtualthe virtual tape machines is
(13:09):
what it's called.
That's what the slate digitalones called, the virtual tape
machines.
Okay, so that's my mix bus.
Now I'm not saying copy that byany stretch.
This is what I did for this onehere.
So this is subjective, this ismy view of this mix.
So that's not me saying copythese movements for your
top-down mix or even use thesesame plugins.
(13:30):
This is just what I've used.
Okay, so I've teased it forlong enough now.
Let's have a listen.
So we'll listen to the staticmix first.
So I'm gonna play the staticmix for this Tune Narcissist,
which is gonna be out on Octoberthe 17th, by the way, and I'll
put a link in the episodedescription.
Okay, and now this is mixedthree using the top-down mix
(14:04):
approach.
I wait for that uh that reverband that delay to decay.
(14:26):
Uh, but there you go, folks.
That is how I use the top-downmixing approach.
And hopefully you can hear fromthe static mix, to be honest.
Uh, that sort of underpinnedthis top-down mixing approach
that I've got here.
And you, I mean, you mightlisten to this and think,
actually, well, that doesn'treally work, and I would have
taken it in a totally differentdirection, which is fine.
That's the great thing aboutmusic, right?
Everybody's got their sort ofopinions and the way they would
(14:47):
approach things.
But again, folks, this isn't medirecting or telling you how to
use the top-down mix.
This is just my thoughts andopinions and my evaluation of
it.
Uh, in short, with my sort ofevaluation and my and to
summarize, really, I'm gonna useit again, again on my own
productions before I decidewhether or not I'm gonna
release, uh, use it on clientproductions faster.
(15:09):
It I find it is definitelyfaster.
I got to a mix that I was happywith a lot quicker.
Certainly a mix I was happy toshare with others for feedback.
And uh I was also finding thatI was making fewer movements
overall, fewer movements overallwith this.
I wasn't getting stuck in theweeds with in particular because
(15:30):
what I find with with with thewith the sort of bottom-up
mixing, you can get stuck in theweeds, maybe you're mixing a
particular instrument, it's justnot sitting right, and you get
stuck there.
Whereas when you go the otherway, you're sort of listening to
things holistically, which Iquite like.
But I still did go in and diveinto individual tracks.
So I didn't get stuck in theweeds so much.
I say that actually, to befair, I did with the reverb,
(15:50):
with the time-based processing.
I found that tricky.
But I think it could well bebecause of the track rather than
the process.
So I'm waffling a bit here, butquicker, uh less processing,
broader strokes, but really yougotta have a good static mix to
begin with, and a goodarrangement.
So there we go, folks.
(16:10):
That is the top-down mixingtechnique.
Um so my challenge to you takeone unmixed track, I'm looking
at my notes here, and commit tomixing it using the top-down
mixing technique.
Use those resources that I'velinked to in the episode
description and do some researchinto the process and have a go
(16:34):
yourself.
See how you find it, and comeback and let me know.
There is there is rather a linkin the episode description, so
you can send me a message, maybewith a link to the mix itself,
so I can check it out and giveit a listen.
And then if you release it, letme know.
And then also I could uh linkit in an episode and give you a
shout-out as well.
So you can send me a message onthat.
But that's my challenge to you.
Do some research like I did,and have a go at the top-down
(16:56):
mixing process, or rathertechnique.
If you're enjoying theseepisodes and you would like to
support the podcast, please dojoin my YouTube membership for
less than the price of a coffeeper month.
You'll get access to membershipperks like loyalty badges,
priority reply to comments,episode shout outs, and early
(17:16):
access to episodes of the Insidethe Mix podcast.
Just click the link in theepisode description.
And until next time, stayinspired, keep creating, and
don't be afraid to experimentinside the mix.
What if I told you that the secret to a
balanced mix that translatesacross all systems starts long
before you do any processing ofindividual tracks?
I'm pulling back the curtain onmy very first top-down mix
evaluation and answering thequestion: is top-down mixing for
me?
You're listening to the Insidethe Mix podcast with your host,
(00:22):
Mark Matthews.
Welcome to Inside the Mix, yourgo-to podcast for music
creation and production.
Whether you're crafting yourfirst track or refining your
mixing skills, join me each weekfor expert interviews,
practical tutorials, andinsights to help you level up
your music and smash it in themusic industry.
Let's dive in.
(00:43):
Hello folks, and welcome toInside the Mix and a big welcome
if you are a new listener.
So, in this episode, as Imentioned in the introduction
there, I'm going through theevaluation of my first top-down
mixing session.
Now, in my 10 plus years ofmusic production in various
guises, this is the first timethat I've ever done top-down
mixing, and I was inspired to dothis after my conversations
(01:06):
with Brian Skeele in episode 215and Nate Kelms in episode 197,
both of the Inside the Mixpodcast.
So do go check those episodesout where we drill down a bit
deeper into the top-down mixingprocess.
So a quick disclaimer on thisepisode: this isn't me educating
you on how to use the top-downmixing process or go through a
top-down mix.
(01:27):
This is just my thoughts andopinions on what I experienced
going through this process forthe first time.
When learning something new, Igenerally go through my due
diligence process.
So obviously, I had thoseconversations with uh Nate Helns
and Brian Skill, but I also didsome research of my own and
found some really goodinstructional videos on YouTube.
And I'll put a link to thosevideos in the episode
(01:49):
description.
So if you want a breakdown or aplay-by-play of how to go
through the top-down mixingprocess, I've linked, or rather,
I put some links in the episodedescription that you can use to
uh to educate yourselves, muchlike I did.
So some inspiration for you,and you'll find that in the
episode description.
So the core philosophy oftop-down mixing or master bus
(02:10):
processing, as some do call it,is to start at the mix bus or
the master bus, whichever,whichever sort of version you
want to use of that of thatname.
And basically, you're listeningto the mix as a whole, as
really you should do any when itwhen it comes to mixing, but
you're not focusing on the finerdetails.
So you can think of it thisway: the what the way I did it
and the way I sort of got fromthe from the research I went
(02:32):
through was you've got sort ofbus compression, you've got EQ,
maybe maybe some saturation aswell.
And that's pretty much what Idid.
But what I found were thesebroad strokes worked really well
in sort of like low and highshelves, and then if I wanted to
boost something in the in themid-range, quite wide cues, but
at the same time, I wasn't goingtoo crazy with my with my game,
(02:54):
with the boosts that I wasusing, or the cuts as well, to
be honest.
Can't remember if I did anycuts.
I may have done.
Um possibly.
But anyway, what I was findingwas I was just making these
subtle changes, but it washaving a huge impact on the
overall sound of the mix.
And I mean, to cut a long storyshort, what I found was when it
actually came to the fullmixing process, it was
(03:15):
significantly shorter in termsof time and effort, really, and
also in CPU processing, becauseI found I was using fewer
plugins because I was doing itfrom the top down, I was
starting at the mix bus, then mygroups, then my individual
tracks.
When I did get down to theindividual tracks, I was finding
that I might have just put someEQ on there and then I might
(03:36):
have done a low shelf on a vocalor a high pass on a vocal or
something like that.
Now there is one point thatneeds to be made with regards to
this, I think, and this is mypersonal opinion.
All of this is my opinion, bythe way, folks.
So it's um you can sort of takeit or leave it if you will.
But basically, you need tostart with a good static mix.
If you don't have a good staticmix and arrangement, to be
(03:58):
honest, obviously uh a good mixis underpinned by a good
arrangement, then you arestarting on the back foot.
So you've got to have a goodstatic mix and a good
arrangement before you eventhink of going to that, sort of
starting at the top and workingyour way down with this mixing
process.
And uh one tip I did get fromone of these videos in
particular was to bounce thestatic mix and then re-import it
(04:19):
as a reference so you canquickly A B between what you're
doing with your top-down mix andyour static mix and see what
changes you're making andwhether you're making the right
movements, the right moves,let's say.
I'm gonna quickly go throughthe process I went through when
it came to my my top-down mixfor the first time.
So I've got my notes to myright here.
So I've got initial listeningand vision setting.
(04:41):
So I wanted to ascertain whatthe song was trying to be.
I knew the genre and I knew theknew the mood and the core
elements, but this is reallywhere a reference track helped
me, a reference track, sorry,helped me.
Obviously, I've got my staticmix reference, but I always use
another reference.
Um, I'm always inspired byanother song, to be honest.
When it when it comes to makingor creating my own music, I
(05:04):
always use a song as uh as areference in terms of the
production, the arrangement, andthe mix and the master.
And what I really found helpfulhere in particular was a song
in the same key.
So I could make movementsknowing that this is a
commercial, commerciallysuccessful song with a very good
mix master, and I want to sortof emulate what's going on
(05:25):
there.
And then air quotes, I wantedto identify my north star, which
was kind of like the focalpoint of the song.
So using the reference trackagain, I identified okay, well,
I really want the bass to pushforward the track.
I want the bass to be really umprominent, as bass should be.
I mean, I love bass, I love aprominent bass, and you'll find
(05:46):
that in my productions.
But I really wanted the bass todrive the song forward and then
the vocal.
For me, it was about bass andvocal in this particular.
I will play it at the end, I'lldo an A-B so you can hear the
difference between the staticmix and sort of my my third and
final mix.
But yeah, I I identified that Ireally wanted the bass and the
and the vocal to be prominent inthis particular production from
(06:08):
my reference track.
So having identified thedirection I want to take the
mix, I then moved on to actuallystarting the top-down mixing
process.
And on that mix bus, it reallyis.
I think I started with Soothe2, just tickling some resonant
frequencies, set at about 25% tobe honest, in terms of wet and
dry.
Then some EQ, some broadstrokes with some with EQ, and
then some bus compression usingthe Waves SSL bus compressor,
(06:32):
which I absolutely love by theway.
I think I've used it on everyproduction that I've done since
I can remember, to be honest.
And then I used the slatedigital tape emulation.
I can't remember what it'scalled.
Or well, when we go over to theproject in a minute, I'll be
able to name it in particular.
Um, and that's what my mixedbus looked like.
What I found was when I A-B'dmy top-down mix bus to the
(06:56):
reference track, the thedifference was quite stark, to
be honest, even with just subtlemovements, which I think was
was when the pennies sort ofdropped a bit in terms of oh, I
can okay, I can see how I couldachieve high-quality mixes,
possibly a lot quicker.
Uh, and this was before I'deven moved on to the subgroups.
So having done the mix bus, Iwas happy with the mix bus, I
(07:19):
then moved on to the subgroups.
So I've I've groupedinstruments in terms of drums,
synths, vocals, FX, somesamples, and I think I did a
kick and bus um stack as well.
And then I treated thoseindividually.
And then I moved on to theindividual tracks.
What I did find, and when I wasdoing my doing performing my
due diligence in my research,it's important just because
(07:42):
you're doing the top-down andyou are yeah, you've got that
top-down view, and you're goingfrom the mixed bus to the
groups, do not uh discount goingin and performing some
processing on the individualtracks themselves.
Just because you're doing thetop-down doesn't mean you cannot
do the individual tracks.
You do need to pay attention tothose as well.
(08:02):
But on the flip side of that,what I did find was when I did
do any processing on individualtracks, and I think I mentioned
this earlier in this episode, itwas pretty much just EQ, to be
honest, if I remember rightly.
It was just EQ.
Whereas before, I'd have uhvocal chains, for example, or
something along those lines.
It was pretty much just EQ, andmaybe some creative effects if
(08:24):
I'm doing some side chaining orsomething along those lines.
So having gone through the mixbus, the groups, paid attention
to the individual tracks aswell, remember that's important.
I then moved on to time-basedprocessing, and this is where
it's different to what I wouldusually do, because in my
bottom-up mixing approach, whichis what I've done since day dot
really, I would do the drums,well, mainly kick and bass, and
(08:47):
then vocal.
And in when I do the vocal,that's also when I introduce
time-based processing, because Ilike to get the vocal sitting
where I want it to be, becauseit's the focal point for me in
the mix.
Um, if it's a vocal-led mix,for example.
So I usually introducetime-based processing like
delay, reverb, and chorussooner.
However, in the top-down mixingapproach, I introduced it
(09:10):
later.
And what I did find was it tookme a bit longer, and it could
be to do with the arrangement,it could be to do with the
track, to be honest.
But I did find it took melonger to find the point whereby
I was happy, and I thought thetime-based processing processing
was conducive, conducive to themix.
(09:31):
It did take me longer.
I was just I struggled a bit toget the reverb to sit where I
wanted it to sit.
And again, it could be becauseof the arrangement, it could be
because of the track, but inthis instance, that's what I
found.
Usually it's a lot quicker forme.
And when I go through thisprocess again, maybe two or
three times, I'll be able tomake an informed decision
whether or not whether or notthat's the case.
Because it could be just thismix.
(09:52):
And then I moved on toautomation, and I moved on to
automation at the same time Iusually would.
I get a nice mix, sort of satwhere I want it to be, and then
I use automation just to movethings around, add some
interest, bring things in andout where where needed.
Um, notably, really, what Ifound was I probably used less
automation than I usually would.
Now, in particular with thisarrangement, I think there's
(10:14):
less instrumentation compared toother songs.
So that could be the reasonwhy.
But I found I used lessautomation, which was quite
interesting.
Again, until I've done this twoor three more times, possibly
maybe even five times, I'll beable to make an informed
decision on whether or not,okay, I can see now, in general,
with this approach, I use lessautomation.
But that I could be totallywrong, to be honest.
(10:35):
Well, I might do five moremixes and think I do I need to
use more.
Who knows?
Uh, if you know, let me know.
And then I moved on to loudnessand translation.
So A being it with thereference track, with my static
mix as well, making sure I washappy with the overall tonal
balance and just the overallsort of loudness of the track
and the macro and microdynamicsof the track as well, of the mix
(10:56):
rather, before then moving onto the mastering phase, which I
haven't got to yet with thisparticular track.
It's also important to notethat I did this over multiple
sessions.
I'd always come back with afresh set of ears, listening at
high and low volume, just so Ican make those finer critical
adjustments that I need to.
So before we wrap up thisepisode and my thoughts and
evaluations on the top-downmixing process, let's quickly
(11:19):
dive into logic and have a havea look at what I did.
Just an overview, if you will.
Uh, so you can see here here'sthe I say see here, if you're
listening to this, I'll describeit to you.
Well, we've got my references.
So I've got my uh mynarcissist.
This is the track.
So just to throw this out thereas well, folks, I haven't
trialed this on a client'sproject.
I did it on my own project.
So I'll do this on my ownprojects first before I'm
(11:39):
totally happy to sort of releaseit into the wild if it's the
technique I'm gonna use.
So I've got my reference, mystatic mix.
And then I've got my reference,which is in the same key in
this instance.
I'm not gonna play it so Idon't get stung by YouTube with
a copyright claim.
And I've got another reference,which was my arrangement
reference, which is a CalvinHarris tune called Blessings.
(12:00):
I think the other one's CalvinHarris as well, featuring Neo,
which is my reference in thesame key.
So I've got two referencesthere.
Well, I've got two referencesplus my static mix.
So technically, I've got threereferences, but two sort of
commercial release references.
And I've got my groups.
I've got kick and bass, drums,tops, uplifters, synths,
samples, effects, and vocal.
So those are my groups that Ihave.
(12:21):
And then if we go over to themix bus, on the mix bus, I've
got oh, I was right, my mymemory was right.
I've got Soothe 2.
Uh, I've got this.
There's a nice preset on herewhich I which I tweak called
Kiss in the Mix, which is quitenice on Soothe 2.
Um, Infinity EQ, as you can seehere, some very subtle but
yeah, sort of wide EQ ummovements, Q movements for these
(12:46):
EQ movements.
And then I've got the SSL buscompressor.
Compressor.
Compressor.
God, put my teeth back in.
The SSL bus compressor, which Ilove.
And uh you can see I've gotthat going on here.
Four to one ratio, very slowattack, um, moderately fast
release for this.
And then I've got the virtualthe virtual tape machines is
(13:09):
what it's called.
That's what the slate digitalones called, the virtual tape
machines.
Okay, so that's my mix bus.
Now I'm not saying copy that byany stretch.
This is what I did for this onehere.
So this is subjective, this ismy view of this mix.
So that's not me saying copythese movements for your
top-down mix or even use thesesame plugins.
(13:30):
This is just what I've used.
Okay, so I've teased it forlong enough now.
Let's have a listen.
So we'll listen to the staticmix first.
So I'm gonna play the staticmix for this Tune Narcissist,
which is gonna be out on Octoberthe 17th, by the way, and I'll
put a link in the episodedescription.
Okay, and now this is mixedthree using the top-down mix
(14:04):
approach.
I wait for that uh that reverband that delay to decay.
(14:26):
Uh, but there you go, folks.
That is how I use the top-downmixing approach.
And hopefully you can hear fromthe static mix, to be honest.
Uh, that sort of underpinnedthis top-down mixing approach
that I've got here.
And you, I mean, you mightlisten to this and think,
actually, well, that doesn'treally work, and I would have
taken it in a totally differentdirection, which is fine.
That's the great thing aboutmusic, right?
Everybody's got their sort ofopinions and the way they would
(14:47):
approach things.
But again, folks, this isn't medirecting or telling you how to
use the top-down mix.
This is just my thoughts andopinions and my evaluation of
it.
Uh, in short, with my sort ofevaluation and my and to
summarize, really, I'm gonna useit again, again on my own
productions before I decidewhether or not I'm gonna
release, uh, use it on clientproductions faster.
(15:09):
It I find it is definitelyfaster.
I got to a mix that I was happywith a lot quicker.
Certainly a mix I was happy toshare with others for feedback.
And uh I was also finding thatI was making fewer movements
overall, fewer movements overallwith this.
I wasn't getting stuck in theweeds with in particular because
(15:30):
what I find with with with thewith the sort of bottom-up
mixing, you can get stuck in theweeds, maybe you're mixing a
particular instrument, it's justnot sitting right, and you get
stuck there.
Whereas when you go the otherway, you're sort of listening to
things holistically, which Iquite like.
But I still did go in and diveinto individual tracks.
So I didn't get stuck in theweeds so much.
I say that actually, to befair, I did with the reverb,
(15:50):
with the time-based processing.
I found that tricky.
But I think it could well bebecause of the track rather than
the process.
So I'm waffling a bit here, butquicker, uh less processing,
broader strokes, but really yougotta have a good static mix to
begin with, and a goodarrangement.
So there we go, folks.
(16:10):
That is the top-down mixingtechnique.
Um so my challenge to you takeone unmixed track, I'm looking
at my notes here, and commit tomixing it using the top-down
mixing technique.
Use those resources that I'velinked to in the episode
description and do some researchinto the process and have a go
(16:34):
yourself.
See how you find it, and comeback and let me know.
There is there is rather a linkin the episode description, so
you can send me a message, maybewith a link to the mix itself,
so I can check it out and giveit a listen.
And then if you release it, letme know.
And then also I could uh linkit in an episode and give you a
shout-out as well.
So you can send me a message onthat.
But that's my challenge to you.
Do some research like I did,and have a go at the top-down
(16:56):
mixing process, or rathertechnique.
If you're enjoying theseepisodes and you would like to
support the podcast, please dojoin my YouTube membership for
less than the price of a coffeeper month.
You'll get access to membershipperks like loyalty badges,
priority reply to comments,episode shout outs, and early
(17:16):
access to episodes of the Insidethe Mix podcast.
Just click the link in theepisode description.
And until next time, stayinspired, keep creating, and
don't be afraid to experimentinside the mix.
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.