Post by: j.hall on July 07, 2006, 12:55:45 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=20000 5194437
Post by: bblackwood on July 07, 2006, 02:49:37 PM
Post by: Buzz on July 07, 2006, 03:14:49 PM
LAter
Buzz
Post by: j.hall on July 07, 2006, 04:10:46 PM
the Amek just slows me down with my current work load of doing multiple records at the same time. i just can't recall the desk fast enough.
Post by: CaptainHook on July 08, 2006, 01:06:20 AM
PM me if ya interested.
Post by: cowudders on July 16, 2006, 01:45:57 PM
Post by: j.hall on July 16, 2006, 03:06:09 PM
some one that records should be using this thing. it's an in-line desk designed for tracking an mixing. the automation power is awesome.
using it for summing is pretty silly honestly.
Post by: Frob on July 19, 2006, 06:23:03 PM
Post by: league_of_james on August 16, 2006, 02:05:59 PM
Post by: stevieeastend on August 16, 2006, 06:03:15 PM
J.,
How would you comment the difference in sound to your summing box?
cheers
steveeastend
Post by: j.hall on August 17, 2006, 09:18:35 PM
thus far, my work flow has been very enjoyable, and my ability to recall mixes and work on other projects is awesome.
Post by: stevieeastend on August 18, 2006, 01:32:19 PM
| j.hall wrote on Fri, 18 August 2006 02:18 |
i actually decided to not go with a summing box and just mix ITB. after much listening to some mixes done through two different summing boxes and ITB level matched, i decided there was hardly a big enough difference to make the summing boxes worth the expense. thus far, my work flow has been very enjoyable, and my ability to recall mixes and work on other projects is awesome. |
I hear you concerning the workflow. But the sound? Still cannot warm up for ITB mixes though...
cheers
steveeastend
Post by: j.hall on August 18, 2006, 11:03:30 PM
i hope to never go back.
Post by: mcsnare on August 19, 2006, 12:36:04 AM
Dave
Post by: iCombs on August 19, 2006, 01:27:54 AM
| j.hall wrote on Fri, 18 August 2006 22:03 |
it s a done deal for me. i hope to never go back. |
I assume you still sum your 2-buss OTB through some sort of compressor (assuming you decide the mix needs 2-buss compression), or am I just "making an ASS of U and ME?"
Post by: j.hall on August 21, 2006, 04:35:49 PM
that's not summing though, that's 2 buss processing.
Post by: scott volthause on August 21, 2006, 04:42:39 PM
and bored.
Post by: Fibes on August 21, 2006, 05:40:36 PM
| mcsnare wrote on Sat, 19 August 2006 00:36 |
For recording, having a console is a big plus for quick cue mixes, routing and such. In mixing, any sonic argument aside, for me faders are so slow and cumbersome. I much prefer using the automation in Pro Tools. A friend of mine commented that he viewed analog summing boxes as Methodone. Sooner or later you have to get off the stuff. I went cold turkey. Dave |
Lately the cuemix system i have set up is better than any i've had on a console.
It helps having one of those multichannel "more me" systems. Send 'em the stems and go...
Post by: iCombs on August 21, 2006, 07:34:04 PM
| j.hall wrote on Mon, 21 August 2006 15:35 |
i come out to a sontec MEP-250EX EQ then to an SSL G384 comp and back into pro tools to print the mix. that's not summing though, that's 2 buss processing. |
Fair enough. I've been working similarly, running my mixes through a Drawmer 1968 and back into Vegas to print. Do you bounce out through outboard EQ and compression for individual tracks or do you lean more heavily on plugs? The only reason I ask is that I'm working fairly hybrid right now, though I only have the one outboaard EQ (probably my next big investment...a couple different EQ's). I was just wondering what your workflow looked like as compared to mine...see if I could scam some good ideas from someone in the same boat as myself.
Post by: j.hall on August 22, 2006, 10:19:55 PM
so if i need some dbx 162 on something, i'll use it. same with my ashly's and my sphere EQ's.
it's hard to say how much i use all of them but they do see use on an average basis.