Print

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

[JPérez]

Hello , i have been reading a lot around bouncing and final mix recording. I never could hear the degradation before . Now I'm mixing out the box and I'm sending the mixer out to a Apogee ....an AUX in PT ....and I'm bouncing the AUX.....
I prefer to mix out...i do want a OUT-IN the box debate.I would like a good advice about how can i print a good image,something like I'm listening when i playing back  PT through my transformers analog mixer.
I can compare the analog out of my analog mixer and the sound of the bounced digital version. It have less depth .

I can use for final mix an Apogee AD16x but a can note a subtle degradation when i bounce to the same computer.

I heard i must record my final mix to a devices like Alesis Masterlink. Nowaday i havn't one but i have a old computer , maybe it could do the job...???

Would be the same a PC with very good converters?

[compasspnt]

Hola Juan,

You can print your mix to several destinations with very good quality.  You could record back into your multitrack session (if it is at the desired sample rate/bit depth), or to an external device such as a Masterlink, or to another computer running proper software, or of course to an analogue tape machine.  The key, if mixing to digital, is indeed to enter the mix domain through very best A>D converter than you can get, and to keep your levels at reasonable peak values (approx -3 to -6).  The final level can be optimised by your Mastering Engineer.

Buen suerte!

[bobkatz]

I've compared, again and again, clients' captures done three different ways, all digitally, and they all match digitally. The only times I've seen bounces be different have been when the CPU was overloaded and automation moves were not quite performed at the same time.

Except one time recently. The null test revealed the guitar reverb and vocal reverb were different! Hey, no surprise, different on each pass due to the randomization algorithms in the reverb chamber.

Ho hum....  It's real easy to say you hear differences. It's a lot harder to admit that you don't hear them.

Here's another one, SADiE's automation display of fader levels seems to differ by 0.01 dB sometimes between automation record and automation playback, because they compute the fader levels to X number of bits. Does this mean that captures are bogus? Of course not. But it does mean that two passes will not null. Will they sound different because of those 0.01 dB differences? Could you tell?

BK

[JPérez]

Thanks!

OK ...digital recording .

A last question:

Is Masterlink quality or similar equal PC with very good converters?.

I'm sure when i listen through the analog out a song sound better than i listen the recorded version, the difference is subtle but it exist. Maybe are the converters maybe the hard disk ditter...i don't know....

Bouncing in PT is changing the sound and i saw in a magazine that final master is better on a external recorder. If you are mixing on analog desk i can feel when you return to digital a degradation. My hope is recording 2-track out my mac-PT using another computer would give benefits to my pre-master.

[compasspnt]

Again, the key, whether using Masterlink or computer, is excellent converters.

[Dave Peck]

compasspnt wrote on Wed, 02 November 2005 22:48

Again, the key, whether using Masterlink or computer, is excellent converters.

Yep. For me, Masterlink Dig In (with all DSP off) + Pacific Microsonics converter at 24 bit 88.2kHz is the best combo for 2CH mixdown from analog. Sounds great, very convenient. Also provides the best format for the mastering guy who also has a PM converter to get from 24/88.2 to 16/44.1 CD Red Book.