R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 11   Go Down

Author Topic: External summing of DAW mixes  (Read 46644 times)

wwittman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7712
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #30 on: October 07, 2008, 12:59:52 pm »

groundhog wrote on Tue, 07 October 2008 11:58

Dave @ D D wrote on Tue, 07 October 2008 11:26




Tracking and mixing at low-levels has dramtically improved my work  .....


Same here , yet with still much room for improvement .

Would anyone mind sighting an example or two of specific routing you're using when going through a summing device like the Dangerous 2 Buss ?   Somehow going back into the same DAW seems almost counter productive , yet it seems as though many do just that .




why is it counter productive?

in a "big studio" where I'm mixing on a console anyway, I certainly much prefer to mix to 1/2" 2 track.
but in thsoe situations where I am ITB or on a summing box (semi-ITB?) then it's also unlikely that there is an analogue 2 track.

It the digital format is good enough (96/24) for the multi track, then surely it's not SO bad for the mix?

At one place where I mix a lot, I used to try also recording through a GML convertor direct to CD (an HHB) as well.
and I still do that there for refs to take home.
But I stopped bringing that to mastering as I found that the result was always better bringing analogue tape or 24 bit digital rather than MY doing the converting to 16 bit ahead of time.

Logged
William Wittman
Producer/Engineer
(Cyndi Lauper, Joan Osborne, The Fixx, The Outfield, Hooters...)

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #31 on: October 07, 2008, 01:32:01 pm »

groundhog wrote on Tue, 07 October 2008 11:58

Somehow going back into the same DAW seems almost counter productive...



For me, it is the least of the options, even at 96/24. As Wm points out, a great two track analogue would be wonderful when available.

But I would just as much like, if not prefer, the Korg 1000 DSD recorder.

As small as a hard drive, relatively inexpensive, easily carried around and patched in, and sounds like the best two track without any noise. @ 5.6.

Far better than 96/24.
Logged

Mike P

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 374
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #32 on: October 07, 2008, 03:11:50 pm »

I prefer out of the box mixing by a wide margin.  I've owned the Neve 8816 summing mixer for about 18 months now and I'm very pleased with the sound and the results.

A typical rock/jazz/R&B configuration coming out of Nuendo 4.2 and a DA16x is as follows:

1&2:  Rhythm guitars
3:  Bass guitar
4: Guitar Solo
5&6:  Guitar overdubs
7:  Main vocal
8,9,10:  Background vocals (or non-main vocal parts)
11&12:  Drum Kit (overheads, hats, toms)
13: Kick
14: Snare
15&16:  VST effects

At this point in time, I'm sending the two track out back into Nuendo for mixing.  At some point in future, I'd like to experiment with DSD or a two channel converter box such as the UA2192.  But for now, I'm happy and my clients are happy.

Logged

Throatsinger

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 64
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #33 on: October 08, 2008, 09:58:04 am »

Terry, how are the mic inputs on this unit?

Thanks,

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #34 on: October 08, 2008, 10:22:49 am »

throatsinger wrote on Wed, 08 October 2008 09:58

Terry, how are the mic inputs on this unit?




I believe this question pertains to the KORG 1000 DSD recorder...

The unit is indeed designed as a ("Nagra/Uher replacement" type) field recorder.  There are both mic and line inputs, and of course built-in microphone preamplification.

Unfortunately, so far I have only used the line ins, not any mic in as yet, so I personally cannot answer.
Logged

organica

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2226
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #35 on: October 08, 2008, 10:29:37 am »

Anyone tried the Folcrom  ?
http://www.rollmusic.com/folcrom.php

Seems like a strong concept going passive with the box and then going with whatever style of make-up gain you choose .
Logged

tunetown

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 108
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #36 on: October 08, 2008, 10:00:18 pm »

I recently purchased the API DSM24 system http://www.apiaudio.com/dsm.html . It's basically a 24 channel console in a rack less the Pre and EQ sections. It's nice to be  able to patch hardware through hardware again without those pesky computer ping things.

I'm really happy with this setup. Well worth a look.

Cheers
Logged
Peter Houghton
Tune Town

Bill Mueller

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4502
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #37 on: October 09, 2008, 08:12:00 am »

Hell all,

I don't have a personal opinion here because I have never mixed a song without a console. I'm sure this has been suggested somewhere before, but I have two questions.

Has anyone ever done a double blind study of the ITB versus OTB analog summing? Would that not resolve the question? The majority of opinion here is in favor of OTB but there are some pretty heavy hitters out there who say it is all in your heads.

Other question. Has anyone here ever made a mix OTB and then the same mix ITB or Bounce to Disc and then done a Sum comparison between them? I imagine that could be extremely informative. If the two mixes perfectly cancel, you're trippin'. If they are different, the difference is GOLD. The audio that is left over is what is BETTER! What a hugely valuable thing to know.

I don't have answers about this, only questions. But it seems to me that it should be pretty simple to determine just EXACTLY what is going on. I mean, an entire industry is growing up around the benefit of analog summing. Don't you think it should at least be proven to exist?

Best regards,

Bill
Logged
"Don't take it personally. But this shit is a science." J.J.Blair

“The Internet is only a means of communication,” he wrote. “It is not an amorphous extraterrestrial body with an entitlement to norms that run counter to the fundamental principles of human rights. There is nothing in the criminal or civil law which legalizes that which is otherwise illegal simply because the transaction takes place over the Internet.” Irish judge, Peter Charleton

maxim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5828
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #38 on: October 09, 2008, 08:42:33 am »

another thing to consider is that in experienced hands different tools may produce the same result...
Logged

Tomas Danko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #39 on: October 09, 2008, 09:56:02 am »

We already know that subtle analog distortion can make a stereo sound come out to sound wider.
We also know that background noise can help to gel things in the mix, through masking.
Furthermore, we also know we can get a euphonic bonus due to built-up cross-channel leakage in an analog mixer. When cranking up a signal through compressors and what-not, it can become a real parameter to consider.

And a lot of people are still running their DAW tracks very hot. We know very well how detrimental that can be to audio quality.

But perhaps those issues are merely scratching the surface on the differences between ITB vs OTB.
Logged
http://www.danko.se/site-design/dankologo4s.gif
"T(Z)= (n1+n2*Z^-1+n2*Z^-2)/(1+d1*z^-1+d2*z^-2)" - Mr. Dan Lavry
"Shaw baa laa raaw, sidle' yaa doot in dee splaa" . Mr Shooby Taylor

Bill Mueller

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4502
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #40 on: October 09, 2008, 12:26:59 pm »

Hello Thomas,

Tomas Danko wrote on Thu, 09 October 2008 09:56

We already know that subtle analog distortion can make a stereo sound come out to sound wider.


What? Who knows this? I have never seen an AES paper on this subject in my life. Is this another example of posting an opinion as fact?
Quote:


We also know that background noise can help to gel things in the mix, through masking.


I have read a BBC study that linked tape noise to perceived high frequency response, but never anything about noise being the glue that holds a mix together. Another opinion.

Quote:


Furthermore, we also know we can get a euphonic bonus due to built-up cross-channel leakage in an analog mixer. When cranking up a signal through compressors and what-not, it can become a real parameter to consider.


Again, conjecture. There is not a shred of fact to this statement. I have never read an AES paper that stated that increased cross talk was desirable in an audio circuit. Please back up your statement.
Quote:


And a lot of people are still running their DAW tracks very hot. We know very well how detrimental that can be to audio quality.


Absolutely! Here we agree. However, this has nothing whatsoever to do with OTB summing. Just do as Terry has taught now for four years and lower your gain.
Quote:


But perhaps those issues are merely scratching the surface on the differences between ITB vs OTB.

I will state the simple fact yet one more time. If you invert and sum your ITB mix and your OTB mix and they perfectly cancel, son yer trippin' if you think one sounds different than the other. If they don't and you can get a double blind study to confirm that the OTB mix is discernibly better, than you have the basis for an enhancement scheme. Very valuable information or more bunk.

Best regards,

Bill
Logged
"Don't take it personally. But this shit is a science." J.J.Blair

“The Internet is only a means of communication,” he wrote. “It is not an amorphous extraterrestrial body with an entitlement to norms that run counter to the fundamental principles of human rights. There is nothing in the criminal or civil law which legalizes that which is otherwise illegal simply because the transaction takes place over the Internet.” Irish judge, Peter Charleton

trock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2018
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #41 on: October 09, 2008, 12:32:35 pm »

I think Korg is about to or has released their new Korg

http://www.korg.com/mr2000S/

Logged

eightyeightkeys

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 789
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #42 on: October 09, 2008, 12:53:03 pm »

trock wrote on Thu, 09 October 2008 12:32

I think Korg is about to or has released their new Korg

http://www.korg.com/mr2000S/




Hey Tim :

This product looks very interesting, but, I'm not familiar with the technology.

Is this a stand alone type of product ? That is, it uses it's own conversion, it's own storage, it's own processing, etc...

Sorry, I'm a little lost on this.
Logged
Dave T.
D&D Music

MDM,

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2305
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #43 on: October 09, 2008, 01:13:02 pm »

what's this have to do with summing? you mean as a master recorder?

I hope they come out with a 4-channel version.. or 8-channel soon.
Logged
I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy .. in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry and music.
John Adams (1735-1826) 2nd President, United States

trock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2018
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #44 on: October 09, 2008, 01:40:42 pm »

i just posted it in relation to Terry saying he likies the Korg 1000, so just pointing out this new box
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 11   Go Up