Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[breathe]

I've started a high fidelity vinyl-only record label.  (Long silence).  An artist that I've recently discovered and want to put out is actually a guy who was a pretty good friend of mine (and now a REALLY good friend of mine).  He recorded a whole album in Garageband, which I understand has the same audio engine as Apple Logic.  We've decided that I'm going to remix his album from my new PTHD rig (on my MCI-416), but what continues to astound me is how good the mixes he made in Garageband sound.  They really sound great!!!  Really natural.  WAY better than any PT ITB mix I've heard or attempted to make, and of course I'm taking into account the recording equipment used to make his recordings.  (Long silence).  I think that for anyone mixing in the box Logic is probably a much better option sonically than PT.  My justification of using PT is A) Everyone else uses it and I could exchange sessions with other studios, and B) If I'm mixing almost entirely in analog, then I'm just using PT as a tape recorder, in which case it doesn't sound bad enough to convince me to use other software given situation (A),  How difficult is it to exchange sessions between Logic, PT, and back?

Nicholas

[NelsonL]

I think the biggest reason to use Logic is that you can ditch the host cards and get the cost of the DAW itself down to a very reasonable price. Logic, with the UAD cards, combined with good conversion, seems like a powerful tool set to me. But I've only worked on a rig like that once, mostly I've been all PT and/or 2".

I really don't buy that Logic sounds better though, for me it sounds like cognitive dissonance, because that's exactly the kind of grief that both Logic and GB's interface cause me.

[jrmintz]

There's a thing called "demo love" which is about trying to recreate or beat the magic on a demo and rarely succeeding. Often it's the freshness that is hard to beat, often it's being unwilling to let go of the demos which have the benefit of being first impressions. It has nothing to do with software, and it happened in the analog days as well.

The biggest difference between Logic and PT for me, both of which I own, is that Logic is a better MIDI program. They're pretty even as sound goes, but I prefer PT for mixing and editing audio.

[grantis]

Back in the day when I decided to let go of my ego and actually TRY Logic with an open mind....I discovered Logic to sound DIFFERENT, not necessarily BETTER.  I think it is nonsense to believe you can't make a great sounding mix ITB in PT.

Logic uses OSX core audio....PT uses Digi core audio, I think.

[Sean Eldon Qualls]

I don't want to come off as a dick here...not my intention.

You might consider "trying on a new dress," so to speak.

I think you're missing a pretty big point if you're back to once again blaming the tools. I'll add some carefully placed bold to something you've already written yourself:

breathe

continues to astound me is how good the mixes he made in Garageband sound. ..... better than any PT ITB mix I've heard or attempted to make

See where I'm going?

jrmintz wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 08:46

There's a thing called "demo love" which is about trying to recreate or beat the magic on a demo and rarely succeeding. Often it's the freshness that is hard to beat, often it's being unwilling to let go of the demos which have the benefit of being first impressions. It has nothing to do with software, and it happened in the analog days as well.

Undeniably true. My advice is to never work too hard on the demos if you actually want to use them as skeletal demos and have plans to "do it again, better."

Always comes back to bite you in the ass as in the quote above.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with the fact that his "demo" balance and mix decisions are better. He should just use his mix if he can't find anyone to do it better.

I like and use Logic, as well. I don't break into sweat and tears when I work in Pro Tools.

[meverylame]

breathe wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 03:01

I've started a high fidelity vinyl-only record label.  (Long silence).  An artist that I've recently discovered and want to put out is actually a guy who was a pretty good friend of mine (and now a REALLY good friend of mine).  He recorded a whole album in Garageband, which I understand has the same audio engine as Apple Logic.  We've decided that I'm going to remix his album from my new PTHD rig (on my MCI-416), but what continues to astound me is how good the mixes he made in Garageband sound.  They really sound great!!!  Really natural.  WAY better than any PT ITB mix I've heard or attempted to make, and of course I'm taking into account the recording equipment used to make his recordings.  (Long silence).  I think that for anyone mixing in the box Logic is probably a much better option sonically than PT.  My justification of using PT is A) Everyone else uses it and I could exchange sessions with other studios, and B) If I'm mixing almost entirely in analog, then I'm just using PT as a tape recorder, in which case it doesn't sound bad enough to convince me to use other software given situation (A),  How difficult is it to exchange sessions between Logic, PT, and back? Nicholas

Hey Nicholas,
I'm going to say something kind of bold as its a theme I've noticed in all your posts.
Dude, I'll guarantee you its not Garageband  and its not the gear he tracked it through. Your buddy, at least for that project, knew what he was doing.
Yes of course the gear makes a difference, but only to an extent.

And here's the tough part...

You probably keep looking for plugins, programs, preamps, dynamic processing, equalization, effects, converters and the Maharishi to make your work sound better but in all the reality not being a really experienced engineer(and I could be wrong, but a lot of your posts read that way) is what is holding you back from the sounds you want. That's not a slight just one guys opinion, again NOT BAD, but inexperienced. Go find a studio with a good engineer, humbly tell them you don't know shit(even if you know TONS) and start working for free. Best thing your money will ever provide you.

[Tomas Danko]

grantis wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 15:01

Back in the day when I decided to let go of my ego and actually TRY Logic with an open mind....I discovered Logic to sound DIFFERENT, not necessarily BETTER.  I think it is nonsense to believe you can't make a great sounding mix ITB in PT. Logic uses OSX core audio....PT uses Digi core audio, I think.

AFAIK Logic had it's own engine up to version 8 when they switched to Quicktime/OSX Core Audio.

On a more practical level, Logic and PT LE are 32 bit floating point but PT LE doesn't have ADC (latency compensation) which Logic has. And of course, PT HD is 48 bit fixed but with 24 bit fixed plug-in instances.

These things tend to make a mix "sound different" more than any math IMHO.

The key here is to know your engine, and you'll be able to produce totally fine mixes regardless of DAW.

[Tomas Danko]

meverylame wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 15:37

breathe wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 03:01 I've started a high fidelity vinyl-only record label.  (Long silence).  An artist that I've recently discovered and want to put out is actually a guy who was a pretty good friend of mine (and now a REALLY good friend of mine).  He recorded a whole album in Garageband, which I understand has the same audio engine as Apple Logic.  We've decided that I'm going to remix his album from my new PTHD rig (on my MCI-416), but what continues to astound me is how good the mixes he made in Garageband sound.  They really sound great!!!  Really natural.  WAY better than any PT ITB mix I've heard or attempted to make, and of course I'm taking into account the recording equipment used to make his recordings.  (Long silence).  I think that for anyone mixing in the box Logic is probably a much better option sonically than PT.  My justification of using PT is A) Everyone else uses it and I could exchange sessions with other studios, and B) If I'm mixing almost entirely in analog, then I'm just using PT as a tape recorder, in which case it doesn't sound bad enough to convince me to use other software given situation (A),  How difficult is it to exchange sessions between Logic, PT, and back? Nicholas Hey Nicholas, I'm going to say something kind of bold as its a theme I've noticed in all your posts. Dude, I'll guarantee you its not Garageband  and its not the gear he tracked it through. Your buddy, at least for that project, knew what he was doing. Yes of course the gear makes a difference, but only to an extent. And here's the tough part... You probably keep looking for plugins, programs, preamps, dynamic processing, equalization, effects, converters and the Maharishi to make your work sound better but in all the reality not being a really experienced engineer(and I could be wrong, but a lot of your posts read that way) is what is holding you back from the sounds you want. That's not a slight just one guys opinion, again NOT BAD, but inexperienced. Go find a studio with a good engineer, humbly tell them you don't know shit(even if you know TONS) and start working for free. Best thing your money will ever provide you.

Oh man, the amount of recording sessions he's already done for free (albeit getting booze and beer for free, that is)... I think there's nothing wrong with the quality of Nicholas' recordings.

[mixwell]

breathe wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 02:01

How difficult is it to exchange sessions between Logic, PT, and back?

For me, it is as simple as making time stamped BWAV/WAV/AIFF audio files. The real standard is the PCM data inside the workstation.

With some clever problem solving skills, you can educate your clients about about the data they are working with, and communicate to them how a DAW works so you can decide which program the musical performances will be gathered in.

After all, they all get you the same place, but it is the choice of the operator to dictate what is needed. Personally, I think I would be f#cked if I let the "tools" dictate my existence. They do not. I dictate the existence of these tools.

[breathe]

Sean, blaming the tools is what this forum is all about!  If the tools had nothing to do with the outcome of the final product then they would mean nothing.  I personally have experienced a significant difference between the way PT/PTHD/Logic/Samplitude/Cubase SX/Sadie Artemis/Sonic Studio/and Sonic Studio HD play back and combine sounds.  That's a personal experience.  I feel I can say that, and once again if the tools didn't mean anything then there's no reason why mastering engineers shouldn't all master in PT, with plug-ins no less.  My recording career is hit and miss I acknowledge, but I've done some stuff I really like.  

Nicholas

Sean Eldon Qualls wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 07:12

I don't want to come off as a dick here...not my intention. You might consider "trying on a new dress," so to speak. I think you're missing a pretty big point if you're back to once again blaming the tools. I'll add some carefully placed bold to something you've already written yourself: breathe continues to astound me is how good the mixes he made in Garageband sound. ..... better than any PT ITB mix I've heard or attempted to make See where I'm going? jrmintz wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 08:46 There's a thing called "demo love" which is about trying to recreate or beat the magic on a demo and rarely succeeding. Often it's the freshness that is hard to beat, often it's being unwilling to let go of the demos which have the benefit of being first impressions. It has nothing to do with software, and it happened in the analog days as well. Undeniably true. My advice is to never work too hard on the demos if you actually want to use them as skeletal demos and have plans to "do it again, better." Always comes back to bite you in the ass as in the quote above. Of course, there's nothing wrong with the fact that his "demo" balance and mix decisions are better. He should just use his mix if he can't find anyone to do it better. I like and use Logic, as well. I don't break into sweat and tears when I work in Pro Tools.

[Jay Kadis]

My most recent project was recorded and mixed in Pro Tools TDM and the previous one in Logic 8.  Both sound fine.  Any differences in sound can easily be compensated, although I did notice a little less delay intrusion tracking in Logic.

[Halfway Competent]

Jay Kadis wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 08:26

My most recent project was recorded and mixed in Pro Tools TDM and the previous one in Logic 8.  Both sound fine.  Any differences in sound can easily be compensated, although I did notice a little less delay intrusion tracking in Logic.

A guy once told me that he couldn't track guitar directly into Pro Tools or any other DAW for that matter due to the latency introduced on his playing.  I told him that Pro Tools "Low Latency Monitoring" mode had so little latency I basically didn't notice it.  He said he would notice it, and that he could hear a 1 ms latency.  This is absurd, because if he steps a foot away from his guitar amp, he's introduced a 1 ms latency between his finger hitting the string, and him hearing the result.  Of course, if he's hearing both the amp, AND what's coming through headphones at the same time, then that's a different story...

I used Logic once...  A studio that had Logic and Apogee's Symphony stuff with an AD16.  I found it extraordinarily cumbersome, having to set up a headphone mix with a hardware control panel outside the DAW, setting up another mix inside the DAW, and then there was no good way to keep a take, yet also record one more (he added a bunch of new tracks and muted the previous take).  No thanks.

[MrJoshua]

I'm certainly not as experienced or knowledgeable as a lot of the people in this forum, but I've always been of the opinion that a good recording is much more reliant on skill and work than it is on the gear you're using.  I've had guys bring me "demos" they made on an 8-track Fostex tape deck and a little Mackie mixer that sounded amazing because they spent months tweaking it and getting everything perfect, and I've heard guys make horrible crap in Pro Tools because hey, it can just be fixed later, right?

[Jay Kadis]

Halfway Competent wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 09:10

I used Logic once...  A studio that had Logic and Apogee's Symphony stuff with an AD16.  I found it extraordinarily cumbersome, having to set up a headphone mix with a hardware control panel outside the DAW, setting up another mix inside the DAW, and then there was no good way to keep a take, yet also record one more (he added a bunch of new tracks and muted the previous take).  No thanks.

Most of that has been fixed now.  I always use an outboard mixer anyway as  I still don't like tracking entirely ITB on any DAW.

[Daniel Farris]

breathe wrote on Wed, 20 January 2010 08:12

I personally have experienced a significant difference between the way PT/PTHD/Logic/Samplitude/Cubase SX/Sadie Artemis/Sonic Studio/and Sonic Studio HD play back and combine sounds.

Who has time to compare all those DAW's?

Man, I've got real work to do!

Pick one, forgive yourself, and then move the fuck on.

DF