Parallel Filters, God Tier: The Delta Channel 

Well said! This guy is AWESOME

thank you for this tip lmfao i just wrote a comment being like damn this shit hard, but you have blessed me with a good solution.. thank you

Could work, but inside an AER you'd have to create eg 3 channels: Dry, Signal1 with inverted polarity, Signal 2, then instead of having a single fader to decide the volume of Signal1invpol+Signal2 you'd have 2 volume faders (that you could map to an AER macro though), good call anyway for those working more with inserts than sends.

I only got this to work by: Sending the instrument I wanted to stay in phase to the master and also routing it fully to the return track. Sending the instrument I wanted to be flipped to an audio track with the phase invert plugin. Sending that audio track with the plugin to the master. Setting the audio track with the plugin to "In" monitoring mode. Putting my phase flip and other effects on the return track.

Yeah, you can do it in most daws, it's just not as neat, because you have to use an intermediate track.

You can save ableton tracks to come on with whatever plugins you want. I would set up for every track to come on with a utility, as it takes virtually no processing power.

He gave a good explanation for this on the last parallel filters video. Paraphrasing, the advantages are what you said, plus the ability to use non-linearities (assuming a colorful filter), plus the ability to morph between filter shapes.

So in that sense, does the simplification of automation give you greater control over the outcome of a mix? Is that just a standard part of 'big picture' mixing that can't be represented quite clearly through youtube tutorial?

@@vAlkemistv I mean I personally think Dan Worrall is quite excellent at representing everything through youtube tutorials haha! I would say something that I've learned is that, if something is hard to do, people won't do it! So for example, There's been ways to use any plugin to do some Mid-Side processing, for a long time, but most people didn't really explore those options, until M/S processing became something you turn on by the press of a button on the plugin interface. So this is similar to that. If I have to work on 3 tracks to get a brighter mix, I may just convince myself that it's bright enough, but a single fader I can move, then it's at least worth trying, even though I may realize that it was bright enough, in which case, a single Command+Z gets me back to where I was :)

Patcher, the drug induced wet dream of sound engineers.

This doesn't work. How would you get it to flip on and off

i've done the same - but without bus 1. what is the need for bus 1?

Did you Try avoiding buss 1 and send those signals direct to buss 3?

@@lucianogmyeh that's what i've done. So let's say snare is sent to Bus 3, everything else sent to Bus 2. Bus 2 has No Output and Sends to Bus 3. Seems to do the job... i wonder if you suggest the additional Bus 1 for latency/phase alignment?

@@lucianogm That would actually be better. Don't know why I had the bus 1.

@@ala_lana_music Actually. It's not needed. Don't know why I had it

Actually feeling more myself for the first time in ages...

Don't stop

@@DanWorrall that's lovely to hear. Makes my whole day when one of these videos comes out :)

@@DanWorrall Good to hear. You seem very passionate. Love

Dan is the man.

Is it really as simple as that? seems like a perfect solution....

Sure...but the real deal is creativity and its a lot deeper than 2 knobs.... I think you are missing a whole world of implication 1.WORKFLOW: If you template the above idea and drag and drop the solution...you have trained your brain to use more muscle memory. Muscle memory creates reliance on gut feel rather than looking or thinking about it and this is the real bonus. Ive been mixing for 40 years...these are all little gems to add to the workflow. 2. DYNAMIC FREQ PIVOT: The low mids generally have the most contention...this is a good alternative to sidechain/trackspacing as its both substractive and additive. 3. AUTOMATION EASIER: On top of that...being able to simply use a send per target ie a subtract or add, at will, takes a lot of the drudgery out for larger projects as you localise a common tool for global effect; Push/pulling for subtle movement according to context is a very easy action...once again, you can shut your eyes, grab the control and move according to feel...imagine that. Speed becomes the essence...its like life drawing, learning to capture and complete in 3 mins vs 30 mins of drawing that is wasted because the weight doesnt sit correctly kind of works as analogy...for me anyway. Peace! Or just tweak 2 knobs and the myriad of peripheral that goes with it...either or...but Im thankful for the exposition...Cheers Dan

I personally disagree. If you watch all Dan's videos in chronological order across the FabFilter channel and this channel, I think you would be able to follow through all the more recent videos. That's what I've just done (it took me 2/3 months to write down notes and absorb the content) but now this video felt pretty obvious to me. I kind of guessed where he was going the whole time. If you think it's too much effort to start from the beginning, my advice would be if you already know the stuff, you'll move fast anyway. But if you don't, that's probably where you would want to spend your limited learning time first. Start with the basics and build your way toward more advanced material. Enjoy the journey!

Depends on the DAW really. Something like Bitwig you wouldn't really use a traditional mixer-type send approach to create this, you create it outside the channel-based mixer approach in the Grid and as it's in modular form you save it as a preset which is basically then reusable just like anothoer VST plugin in the signal flow or as Bitwig call it a Device chain.

@@SamHocking That's interesting! I have only a very limited insight into Bitwig but I hear lots of interesting stuff about it. What I meant with "template" wasn't really about the ability to save a template in the DAW, but more about the method of parallell filtering in mixing. Seems to me that it can solve very specific issues in a mix and opens up a lot of interesting and creative solutions, which are all dependent on the specific mix itself with all its instruments and arrangements. I do see your point however, like creating new instruments by doing some weird filtering effects that morphs with dynamics and stuff by itself.

Any scenario where parts are conflicting in the same frequency range, and you would otherwise be dialing in reciprocal boosts and cuts with separate EQs.

can you explain more!!

@@Septimopiso I take it you don't listen to Beyonce? :)

The parts all interact, and the processing naturally gets more intense when there are more parts fighting for space in that region. Plus you can tweak the amount of processing with a fader in the mixer, no need to open any plugins again.

@@DanWorrall lol this answer literally avoided your only question. Exactly what I wondered as well mate. Probably gonna stick to the multiband sidechaining too

Bounce all your parallel delta channels together as a delta stem :)

"here are your stems: drums, bass, guitar, vocals, and this one that makes all the rest not suck" ;)

@@DanWorrall Hahaha, Yes that is a great idea, but actually, I also use stems when a song is finished for live shows reasons. I typically render one unique multichannel wav file contaning all the stem tracks that groups the project tracks per element (drums, bass, synt, acoutics, main vocals etc). Then I create a live project, I import this multichannel stem in reaper and depending on my mood, I add effetcs mapped to midi controllers and/or replace some of the tracks live instruments (microphone inputs with looper pedal or not, drum machines, etc). So it does not really fit this application, unless I duplicate the "delta channel" several time and change the routing so that every duplicate doesn't receive several tracks anymore but only one . Also, by doing so, I kind of loose the ability to add a dynamic processor after the band pass filter. Maybe you have other suggestions ?

Ha I found a solution. It works using "render stem through master". I didn't know it, but this options actually render not only through master, but also with sends. I know it can cause problem with dynamics/saturation that are applied on subgroups but I should be able to manage it.

I'm not a Pro Tools user: try it and let us know how you get on ;)

Seems like you should watch that vid again. It's about having the flip on the send, not on the bus itself.

@@Musikproduzent that really isn't a problem, you just send the track to a group track and flip the polarity there before sending it to the main group.

@@lastboxofsparklers jep

@@Musikproduzent in cubase a channel is a channel no matter of its a send or bus. And each has a polarity flip. The plugin itself doesn't need to have it.

@@AboveEmAllProduction they just dont know cubase : ) with the new midi remote I press 2 buttons on my external controller and the parallel send with polarity flip is set up in 2 seconds...