R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 11   Go Down

Author Topic: External summing of DAW mixes  (Read 96970 times)

Fibes

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4306
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #75 on: October 10, 2008, 09:25:00 AM »

Bill,

The 3d audio thing was an eye opener in a yawn inducing sort of way.

I'm going to contend that some DAWs have pan law issues (like some consoles) but the real downhill path is the improper use of levels, plug ins and panning within the DAW.

Logged
Fibes
-------------------------------------------------
"You can like it, or not like it."
The Studio

  http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewArtist ?id=155759887
http://cdbaby.com/cd/superhorse
http://cdbaby.com/cd/superhorse2

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #76 on: October 10, 2008, 09:32:20 AM »

You cannot do the *same* mix through an analogue desk and "in the box."
Logged

Kris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 596
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #77 on: October 10, 2008, 09:33:24 AM »

If your interested, the following link has two mixes of the same song.  

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/1156477-post23.html

The first is a ProTools mix, done after several years of ProTools mixing.  The second is a mix on a Toft ATB, done after just several days of owning my first analog board (approx. a year after the ProTools mix was done).  It took me about two seconds to conclude what I like better.  Over time I have come up with lots more unscientific reasons as to why I like mixing OTB.

Though it's not quite the same mix, I can say I tried to do my best mix both times... feel free to do a 'sum comparison' though I'm not sure if it would be valid?
Logged

tom eaton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3640
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #78 on: October 10, 2008, 09:34:32 AM »

But...but... I saw it on TV!  Digi proved that ProTools can do anything an analog console can do!  

Damn that liberal mainstream media.

Tomas Danko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #79 on: October 10, 2008, 09:51:26 AM »

Fibes wrote on Fri, 10 October 2008 14:25

Bill,

The 3d audio thing was an eye opener in a yawn inducing sort of way.

I'm going to contend that some DAWs have pan law issues (like some consoles) but the real downhill path is the improper use of levels, plug ins and panning within the DAW.




Eye opener indeed!

I consider it required listening for anyone venturing into the world of mixing ITB.

I also have to agree wholeheartedly on everything else said above.
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

phantom309

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2855
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #80 on: October 10, 2008, 09:52:15 AM »

Kris wrote on Fri, 10 October 2008 07:33

If your interested, the following link has two mixes of the same song.  

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/1156477-post23.html

The first is a ProTools mix, done after several years of ProTools mixing.  The second is a mix on a Toft ATB, done after just several days of owning my first analog board (approx. a year after the ProTools mix was done).  It took me about two seconds to conclude what I like better.  Over time I have come up with lots more unscientific reasons as to why I like mixing OTB.

Though it's not quite the same mix, I can say I tried to do my best mix both times... feel free to do a 'sum comparison' though I'm not sure if it would be valid?


hmm...at first the drums just seemed to be a bit louder, but when the first two guitar notes came in, I heard the tonal difference. But it really didn't matter much in the end because I just really like the music. I'd buy either of them. Gotta pick your battles I guess.
Logged
Those that can't get carried away, should be.
http://www.audities.org
http://www.mellotron.com
http://www.myspace.com/auditiesrecording
David T. Kean

Tomas Danko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #81 on: October 10, 2008, 09:56:44 AM »

compasspnt wrote on Fri, 10 October 2008 14:32

You cannot do the *same* mix through an analogue desk and "in the box."



True words indeed.

My experience, going from a hybrid setup to full ITB production, was that come mix down session I had to figure out and learn a whole new set of ninja tricks to put in my bag'o'tools.

The way I could skew a sound into what I wanted in the analog domain didn't really translate into the digital world.

Once I started learning how to compensate during tracking, and what methods I could use in the digital domain to arrive where I wanted in a mix, everything started coming together.

Still, if someone would make an OTB mix and try and mimic that ITB (or perhaps vice versa would make this easier?) I think a null-test output would be very interesting eventhough it does not reflect the way you work ITB vs OTB and the consequences thereof.
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

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #82 on: October 10, 2008, 10:08:39 AM »

OK.

If one did a mix through a desk (Protools > analogue desk / outboard > capture)...

And then did the same song, mixing fully ITB...

And then you did a null test (of course they would not null)...


What exactly would the leftover difference tell you...?
Logged

Bill Mueller

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4502
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #83 on: October 10, 2008, 10:30:01 AM »

trock wrote on Fri, 10 October 2008 08:42

I think, at least on the Yamaha/Steinberg front, that companies are now starting to roll out analog or digital/analog boards that are WRITTEN for a particular DAW. whoch to me means you don't have to spend hours trying to coordinate setups and have issues with products not working well together

this to me is the future, havin a hybrid approach based on the DAW's partnering with hareware vendors to combine the products

the Yamaha N12 i use with cubase and nuendo

the new allen and heath Zed16 i think it is and sonar

real analog boards with pre amps, comps, eq, verb etc that come wiht templates and one FW cable to hook to your pc to allow you inbound routing and then outbound mixing thru the boards

with the yamaha you can hook 2-3 of them together and get with 3, 24 mono and 6 stereo tracks perfectly aligned with cubase or nuendo in and out

this is one area not talked about here is how great it is to have products developed together so setup and maintenence is easy.

for my setup i can have say 2 N12's with just 2 FW cables and all the connectivity, templates and in and out's i need already writeen for me, and tweakable however i want

anyway, i dig this approach if for no other reason then i do believe the sound is better, it offloads a ton of CPU from plugs i would have used, its rock solid and set up for me, and you know it forces me to use my ears again. there is no gui for the mixer eq or comp etc so i have to LISTEN

and its fun

Tim,

This has been my approach for about four years. I have a Yamaha DM2000 interfaced to a MX2424 and I use Pro Tools for recording mixes, album assembly and most of my game audio requirements. I feel this combination of equipment sounds as good as anything I have ever worked with, and I've worked with a LOT of big consoles. As I have said before here, the compressors on the Yamaha could be better, but the pre amps are sweet. I'm looking forward to upgrading it to the V2 software and effects package soon.

My next recorder may be a bigger Pro Tools rig, but it could just as easily be the Tascam X48.

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

Bill Mueller

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4502
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #84 on: October 10, 2008, 10:41:55 AM »

compasspnt wrote on Fri, 10 October 2008 10:08

OK.

If one did a mix through a desk (Protools > analogue desk / outboard > capture)...

And then did the same song, mixing fully ITB...

And then you did a null test (of course they would not null)...


What exactly would the leftover difference tell you...?


Hi Terry,

I'm not sure if your post is regarding my post above, but if so, what I meant was to take an ITB mix, route it both to the two buss and split it to a level matched analog summing console. Then record the outputs from both back to the DAW and compare them. I'm not talking about using an SSL with outboard reverbs and trying to match an ITB mix.

From what I gather, this has been done already and I missed it or did not have time to look into it. If anyone has any more info about these kinds of tests, I would appreciate it and might actually have time now to listen to the results. I don't believe I have a dog in this fight, because of the rig I use, but I often wonder if a dedicated digital console like mine and PT or MX rig constitute ITB? Personally, I doubt it, because I am spreading the processing load across double the processing capacity with the digital console.

Thanks,

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

Tomas Danko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #85 on: October 10, 2008, 10:45:08 AM »

compasspnt wrote on Fri, 10 October 2008 15:08

OK.

If one did a mix through a desk (Protools > analogue desk / outboard > capture)...

And then did the same song, mixing fully ITB...

And then you did a null test (of course they would not null)...


What exactly would the leftover difference tell you...?



Why, it's the difference after all said and done. Smile

Including not only the actual audio pathways, the differences between hardware outboard and plug-in emulated ditto's and summing but also the way the mixing engineer interacts in each environment.

If there's some kind of added open airy quality to mixing and summing in the analog domain, it should be apparent in the leftover.
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

tom eaton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3640
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #86 on: October 10, 2008, 10:46:19 AM »

Good point, Bill.  Would mixing on an Axiom or Capricorn or Oxford be considered ITB?  I don't think so, personally.

t

Tomas Danko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #87 on: October 10, 2008, 10:53:06 AM »

Bill Mueller wrote on Fri, 10 October 2008 15:41

compasspnt wrote on Fri, 10 October 2008 10:08

OK.

If one did a mix through a desk (Protools > analogue desk / outboard > capture)...

And then did the same song, mixing fully ITB...

And then you did a null test (of course they would not null)...


What exactly would the leftover difference tell you...?


Hi Terry,

I'm not sure if your post is regarding my post above, but if so, what I meant was to take an ITB mix, route it both to the two buss and split it to a level matched analog summing console. Then record the outputs from both back to the DAW and compare them. I'm not talking about using an SSL with outboard reverbs and trying to match an ITB mix.

From what I gather, this has been done already and I missed it or did not have time to look into it. If anyone has any more info about these kinds of tests, I would appreciate it and might actually have time now to listen to the results. I don't believe I have a dog in this fight, because of the rig I use, but I often wonder if a dedicated digital console like mine and PT or MX rig constitute ITB? Personally, I doubt it, because I am spreading the processing load across double the processing capacity with the digital console.

Thanks,

Bill


Hi Bill,

The ITB acronym as a definition can become a tad bit obscure once we start piping the digital audio between the computer and other external digital units such as, say, your Yamaha DM2000 console or perhaps a digital reverb etc

Still, it's all being computed inside the digital domain and unless the external units are broken they should perform math similar to or surpassing the best software available today. The recent digital Yamaha consoles are great and does not sound anywhere near broken to me but rather the opposite.

So your setup is similar to the hybrid-setup in terms of working methods and connectivity but it's a lot closer to being ITB technically speaking than routing individual tracks of audio from the DAW into an analog console.

Cheers,

Danko
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

Tomas Danko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #88 on: October 10, 2008, 10:56:47 AM »

tom eaton wrote on Fri, 10 October 2008 15:46

Good point, Bill.  Would mixing on an Axiom or Capricorn or Oxford be considered ITB?  I don't think so, personally.

t


I am totally for making the sharp line placed around the boundaries of a computer running the DAW, and calling that ITB. It would only imply that everything is kept inside the computer and that's that.

And working on an awesome Oxford would not be considered ITB.

But what happens when you hook up a bunch of UAD-2 Quad cards, SSL Duende, TC Powercore Firewire DSP farms and some digital synths running as plug-in's over USB?

How does that differ from mixing our DAW digital into an Oxford console? It's clearly still "ITB" since it all resides and rebounds into the computer, but it's got heaps of outboard processors.

Tricky question indeed. Then again, when it comes to making music it doesn't really matter. Smile
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

maxim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5828
Re: External summing of DAW mixes
« Reply #89 on: October 11, 2008, 01:35:15 AM »

"Once I started learning how to compensate ... everything started coming together."


Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 11   Go Up
 

Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.082 seconds with 19 queries.