|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 10, 2022 11:12:57 GMT -6
Have an Orbit on the way. Originally I was gonna run 16 outs from the DAW into the Orbit but maybe that defeats the purpose to some degree ("sum" degree?? get it??? sorry...)
How are you all doing this? I'm thinking maybe the best approach is to put my hardware last in the chain and route that straight into Orbit to so Orbit gets to do it's transformer thing with the purest signal possible.
I mix into busses anyway so this is not a killer. It just reduces my flexibility ever so slightly because I like to put Console 1 as the last insert on busses so I can quickly do teeny tiny tweaks.
Does it matter? (Don't have the orbit yet, can't test... but this impacts my re-patching and preparation to get it set up. I can always change the setup but gotta pick "best guess" setups to start with.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Bat Lanyard on Feb 10, 2022 13:01:12 GMT -6
Probably just gets down to what you prefer? I'm sure it'll sound great either way.
I run 16 out of the DAW eventually into the CAPI SumBus which has two busses out. Those run into an A/B switcher so that I choose there. Mix hardware follows all of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 10, 2022 14:29:54 GMT -6
Probably just gets down to what you prefer? I'm sure it'll sound great either way. I run 16 out of the DAW eventually into the CAPI SumBus which has two busses out. Those run into an A/B switcher so that I choose there. Mix hardware follows all of that. Got it. So your take would be workflow trumps all here. If the workflow is better doing the summing before the bus processing, then that's more important than hitting the summing mixer while all the color from gear is still in the analog realm? Does that summarize your take? |
|
|
|
Post by schmalzy on Feb 10, 2022 15:08:12 GMT -6
My summing has gone through a few permutations:
16 (8 stereo pairs) out to passive summing to a mixbus chain. 8 of my DACs didn't sound as good as I wanted them to for this purpose and I'd rather send fewer tracks out on better DACs. That took me to...
8 (4 stereo pairs) out to passive summing to a mixbus chain. Picked up some love from my makeup gain channel strips and from a Stam SA 4000 compressor as my mixbus.
8 (4 stereo pairs) out to some hardware to passive summing to mixbus chain. Same mixbus hardware but with the vocals going to a stereo compressor, the bass and drums going to a compressor with transformers, the main harmonic instruments going to an unlinked pair of compressors, lead instruments and all ambience FX went straight to passive summing.
In my opinion, if you're leaving the computer for summing then get as much as you can from it. Hit as much hardware as you can, then hit your summing, then hit some more hardware if you want/need, and take that summed and processed stereo pair back into your computer.
Truth be told, thought, I abandoned all the summing and now I'm just going with a stereo pair out to the channel strips then to the Stam SA 4000.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bat Lanyard on Feb 10, 2022 18:22:40 GMT -6
Probably just gets down to what you prefer? I'm sure it'll sound great either way. I run 16 out of the DAW eventually into the CAPI SumBus which has two busses out. Those run into an A/B switcher so that I choose there. Mix hardware follows all of that. Got it. So your take would be workflow *no politics*s all here. If the workflow is better doing the summing before the bus processing, then that's more important than hitting the summing mixer while all the color from gear is still in the analog realm? Does that summarize your take? Personally, I'd hit the Orbit with 16 outputs. I've never used the Orbit before though (looks pretty great and would like to mess with RND silk at some point), but works for me with the SumBus. For a while I ran a patchbay before the SumBus so I could process stems that way but eventually I pulled that out and just went with processing after summing. Edit: caveat is I run a Flock 32i/o so I can process some stuff before summing which I do with every mix. You know, hybrid, LOL. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 10, 2022 19:01:02 GMT -6
Got it. So your take would be workflow *no politics*s all here. If the workflow is better doing the summing before the bus processing, then that's more important than hitting the summing mixer while all the color from gear is still in the analog realm? Does that summarize your take? Personally, I'd hit the Orbit with 16 outputs. I've never used the Orbit before though (looks pretty great and would like to mess with RND silk at some point), but works for me with the SumBus. For a while I ran a patchbay before the SumBus so I could process stems that way but eventually I pulled that out and just went with processing after summing. Edit: caveat is I run a Flock 32i/o so I can process some stuff before summing which I do with every mix. You know, hybrid, LOL. I was moving to this conclusion myself. I think in the end I'll decide this is just too much work and end up patching straight from the 24io into the Orbit. The peace of mind in just building a template in my DAW with the busses prepopulated to the 16 ins outweighs any sonic advantage to doing it the other way. |
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on Feb 10, 2022 19:41:17 GMT -6
I run 16 outs to an SSL X desk... all the outboard lives patched between the DAW & console/summing. The DAW is basically an overgrown tape machine. Mix gets framed ITB and all final sorting happens in the analog doman.
Lots of reasons but two main ones. Simplicity and gain staging. Together they add up to "tone" and while there are a couple downsides there are far more upsides.
Simplicity? I have & use way too much outboard to deal with DAW inserts. Dozens of channels, would probably need at least 64 I/O alone just for outboard. Also eliminates any possible slop from latency and so on. And while round trip conversions aren't really a thing IMO they do add up.
Gain staging? Huge. That's where the money is. Literally.
By plunking outboard between the DAW & desk in a traditional manner there are multiple places to alter the gain staging of multiple elements in the song. Gives the ability to push & pull as needed. If I was dealing with hardware inserts & trying to not clip converters etc it wouldn't be the same. Not even close. Might as well stay ITB.
Downsides? Gotta be diligent about recall notes but really not a problem. Back in the dinosaur days as an assistant I'd have to document every knob & switch on a 56 channel desk... all the EQ's... sends... then all the outboard gear. Would be a legal pad for each song. Now its like 2, maybe 3 sheets of paper each. Easy!
Automation? Yeah... technically I'm driving levels into analog. Not really a problem because I typically don't automate much. Some people who use lots of automation & do a zillion little moves? My method would probably drive 'em crazy because the automation can fight analog processing.
Interesting that the Orbit doesn't have a main insert? So any 2 mix processing has to go post?
What are you using for a monitor controller and 2 mix routing?
|
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 10, 2022 20:22:23 GMT -6
I run 16 outs to an SSL X desk... all the outboard lives patched between the DAW & console/summing. The DAW is basically an overgrown tape machine. Mix gets framed ITB and all final sorting happens in the analog doman. Lots of reasons but two main ones. Simplicity and gain staging. Together they add up to "tone" and while there are a couple downsides there are far more upsides. Simplicity? I have & use way too much outboard to deal with DAW inserts. Dozens of channels, would probably need at least 64 I/O alone just for outboard. Also eliminates any possible slop from latency and so on. And while round trip conversions aren't really a thing IMO they do add up. Gain staging? Huge. That's where the money is. Literally. By plunking outboard between the DAW & desk in a traditional manner there are multiple places to alter the gain staging of multiple elements in the song. Gives the ability to push & pull as needed. If I was dealing with hardware inserts & trying to not clip converters etc it wouldn't be the same. Not even close. Might as well stay ITB. Downsides? Gotta be diligent about recall notes but really not a problem. Back in the dinosaur days as an assistant I'd have to document every knob & switch on a 56 channel desk... all the EQ's... sends... then all the outboard gear. Would be a legal pad for each song. Now its like 2, maybe 3 sheets of paper each. Easy! Automation? Yeah... technically I'm driving levels into analog. Not really a problem because I typically don't automate much. Some people who use lots of automation & do a zillion little moves? My method would probably drive 'em crazy because the automation can fight analog processing. Interesting that the Orbit doesn't have a main insert? So any 2 mix processing has to go post? What are you using for a monitor controller and 2 mix routing? Yeah, no insert which was a factor that I considered but eventually decided I could live with. I'm taking the Orbit out to Silver Bullet using the Orbit's -6db outputs so I can push the transformers (speaking of gain staging). Then I'm either taking it into my Cranborne 500ADAT into a pair of Chroma units on very light settings or into the MOTU 828es (which also answers the monitor controller question). There's another set of outputs that can run concurrently but I don't have any thoughts on if I can use that yet. Kind of leaning towards the Cranborne since I love the headphones on that but I haven't heard the MOTU yet (getting it tomorrow). Anyway, yeah... man, now you're reminding me of why I wanted to do it the "analog path" way to begin with. I don't have nearly as much outboard but I've got enough so that I can touch pretty much everything with a little mojo somewhere. And my approach to outboard is already to gain into it for easier recall as opposed to tweaking. I gotta figure it out relatively quick because I'm redoing my racks and patch bays as we speak in anticipation of this stuff arriving tomorrow and I'd make different decisions depending on different approaches. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 10, 2022 20:38:56 GMT -6
I run 16 outs to an SSL X desk... all the outboard lives patched between the DAW & console/summing. The DAW is basically an overgrown tape machine. Mix gets framed ITB and all final sorting happens in the analog doman. Lots of reasons but two main ones. Simplicity and gain staging. Together they add up to "tone" and while there are a couple downsides there are far more upsides. Simplicity? I have & use way too much outboard to deal with DAW inserts. Dozens of channels, would probably need at least 64 I/O alone just for outboard. Also eliminates any possible slop from latency and so on. And while round trip conversions aren't really a thing IMO they do add up. Gain staging? Huge. That's where the money is. Literally. By plunking outboard between the DAW & desk in a traditional manner there are multiple places to alter the gain staging of multiple elements in the song. Gives the ability to push & pull as needed. If I was dealing with hardware inserts & trying to not clip converters etc it wouldn't be the same. Not even close. Might as well stay ITB. Downsides? Gotta be diligent about recall notes but really not a problem. Back in the dinosaur days as an assistant I'd have to document every knob & switch on a 56 channel desk... all the EQ's... sends... then all the outboard gear. Would be a legal pad for each song. Now its like 2, maybe 3 sheets of paper each. Easy! Automation? Yeah... technically I'm driving levels into analog. Not really a problem because I typically don't automate much. Some people who use lots of automation & do a zillion little moves? My method would probably drive 'em crazy because the automation can fight analog processing. Interesting that the Orbit doesn't have a main insert? So any 2 mix processing has to go post? What are you using for a monitor controller and 2 mix routing? Yeah, no insert which was a factor that I considered but eventually decided I could live with. I'm taking the Orbit out to Silver Bullet using the Orbit's -6db outputs so I can push the transformers (speaking of gain staging). Then I'm either taking it into my Cranborne 500ADAT into a pair of Chroma units on very light settings or into the MOTU 828es (which also answers the monitor controller question). There's another set of outputs that can run concurrently but I don't have any thoughts on if I can use that yet. Kind of leaning towards the Cranborne since I love the headphones on that but I haven't heard the MOTU yet (getting it tomorrow). Anyway, yeah... man, now you're reminding me of why I wanted to do it the "analog path" way to begin with. I don't have nearly as much outboard but I've got enough so that I can touch pretty much everything with a little mojo somewhere. And my approach to outboard is already to gain into it for easier recall as opposed to tweaking. I gotta figure it out relatively quick because I'm redoing my racks and patch bays as we speak in anticipation of this stuff arriving tomorrow and I'd make different decisions depending on different approaches. I think if I just pick up another patchbay I can do either way. Run 16 outs from DAW into the patchbay and normalled into the Orbit. Problem solved, I can choose later. |
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on Feb 11, 2022 0:32:48 GMT -6
Seems a bit convoluted to me but ok.
Guess I gotta wonder... if you don't even have this crap in house yet why not start simple? Get the basics working?
You took a plunge on an RND summing box. Cool. But why not find out what it sounds like on its own? Without all that other stuff in the path? Figure out whatvyour actusl needs are based on reality?
|
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 11, 2022 0:39:20 GMT -6
Seems a bit convoluted to me but ok. Guess I gotta wonder... if you don't even have this crap in house yet why not start simple? Get the basics working? You took a plunge on an RND summing box. Cool. But why not find out what it sounds like on its own? Without all that other stuff in the path? Figure out whatvyour actusl needs are based on reality? That's the idea here. Maybe I'm not explaining it well. Wire it up through the patchbay. If I patch in nothing at all, the output from my MOTU 24AO goes directly from DAW to Orbit (passing through patch bay). I can go straight there and do everything on the channels/busses in the DAW. Or. Without having to rewire anything I can also keep it in the analog realm since all my outboard is already wired up to the same set of patchbays. So I can choose which workflow is best without having to rewire everything. Does that make more sense now? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2022 0:47:46 GMT -6
Seems a bit convoluted to me but ok. Guess I gotta wonder... if you don't even have this crap in house yet why not start simple? Get the basics working? You took a plunge on an RND summing box. Cool. But why not find out what it sounds like on its own? Without all that other stuff in the path? Figure out whatvyour actusl needs are based on reality? That's the idea here. Maybe I'm not explaining it well. Wire it up through the patchbay. If I patch in nothing at all, the output from my MOTU 24AO goes directly from DAW to Orbit (passing through patch bay). I can go straight there and do everything on the channels/busses in the DAW. Or. Without having to rewire anything I can also keep it in the analog realm since all my outboard is already wired up to the same set of patchbays. So I can choose which workflow is best without having to rewire everything. Does that make more sense now? Personally I'd try audio via the MOTU mixer, via the summing path (RND) and both with / without the rest of your analogue chain in the routing design. There's so much speculation surrounding summing mixers, at that price (having to buy the 24 AO as well) I'd be very much focussed on the amount of difference it actually makes vs. your existing HW. There's cheaper and far easier ways to get some transformer action and / or "silk" into your audio streams. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 11, 2022 0:58:22 GMT -6
That's the idea here. Maybe I'm not explaining it well. Wire it up through the patchbay. If I patch in nothing at all, the output from my MOTU 24AO goes directly from DAW to Orbit (passing through patch bay). I can go straight there and do everything on the channels/busses in the DAW. Or. Without having to rewire anything I can also keep it in the analog realm since all my outboard is already wired up to the same set of patchbays. So I can choose which workflow is best without having to rewire everything. Does that make more sense now? Personally I'd try audio via the MOTU mixer, via the summing path (RND) and both with / without the rest of your analogue chain in the routing design. There's so much speculation surrounding summing mixers, at that price (having to buy the 24 AO as well) I'd be very much focussed on the amount of difference it actually makes vs. your existing HW. There's cheaper and far easier ways to get some transformer action and / or "silk" into your audio streams. Oh for sure, all of this is returnable. I'll be testing everything. I'm not spending $2k on something just for the sake of it. That said, I have used the Satellite at my producer's studio and I think the Orbit is pretty similar. I'm probably not explaining this all that well but the routing really is pretty simple once it's set up. |
|
|
|
Post by thirdeye on Feb 12, 2022 22:16:29 GMT -6
Have an Orbit on the way. Originally I was gonna run 16 outs from the DAW into the Orbit but maybe that defeats the purpose to some degree ("sum" degree?? get it??? sorry...) How are you all doing this? I'm thinking maybe the best approach is to put my hardware last in the chain and route that straight into Orbit to so Orbit gets to do it's transformer thing with the purest signal possible. I mix into busses anyway so this is not a killer. It just reduces my flexibility ever so slightly because I like to put Console 1 as the last insert on busses so I can quickly do teeny tiny tweaks. Does it matter? (Don't have the orbit yet, can't test... but this impacts my re-patching and preparation to get it set up. I can always change the setup but gotta pick "best guess" setups to start with.) We have dedicated AD/DA for our outboard hardware and also dedicated DA for our summing and all of it comes up on the patchbay in case we want to change the routing or insert hardware between the DAW and summing. I think leaving your hardware setup as inserts in the DAW works great, and as long as the AD/DA is decent, no need to worry about the round trip in my opinion. I just use hardware and plugin inserts on busses and route those busses out to the summing system (SSL Sigma) with a dither plugin last in the chain. The SSL Sigma Mix A is normallled to my 2 bus chain and I print the mix though a quality AD back into the DAW. I take pictures of all the outboard and recall takes about 5 minutes. SSL Sigma recalls 100% when the plugin loads in the session. Sharing AD/DA between either hardware or summing, things get more difficult. When I've had to do that, I have inserted outboard in between the DAW and summing system. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 14, 2022 11:15:29 GMT -6
Have an Orbit on the way. Originally I was gonna run 16 outs from the DAW into the Orbit but maybe that defeats the purpose to some degree ("sum" degree?? get it??? sorry...) How are you all doing this? I'm thinking maybe the best approach is to put my hardware last in the chain and route that straight into Orbit to so Orbit gets to do it's transformer thing with the purest signal possible. I mix into busses anyway so this is not a killer. It just reduces my flexibility ever so slightly because I like to put Console 1 as the last insert on busses so I can quickly do teeny tiny tweaks. Does it matter? (Don't have the orbit yet, can't test... but this impacts my re-patching and preparation to get it set up. I can always change the setup but gotta pick "best guess" setups to start with.) We have dedicated AD/DA for our outboard hardware and also dedicated DA for our summing and all of it comes up on the patchbay in case we want to change the routing or insert hardware between the DAW and summing. I think leaving your hardware setup as inserts in the DAW works great, and as long as the AD/DA is decent, no need to worry about the round trip in my opinion. I just use hardware and plugin inserts on busses and route those busses out to the summing system (SSL Sigma) with a dither plugin last in the chain. The SSL Sigma Mix A is normallled to my 2 bus chain and I print the mix though a quality AD back into the DAW. I take pictures of all the outboard and recall takes about 5 minutes. SSL Sigma recalls 100% when the plugin loads in the session. Sharing AD/DA between either hardware or summing, things get more difficult. When I've had to do that, I have inserted outboard in between the DAW and summing system. I'm curious, why would sharing AD/DA make a difference? I have two converters (MOTU and Cranborne) so I don't need to share it, but I'm curious why I wouldn't want to. |
|
|
|
Post by maldenfilms on Feb 14, 2022 12:44:51 GMT -6
I just wanted to share my two cents that I got an Orbit a few months ago and was genuinely surprised at how big of a difference it made. I also have a Silver Bullet and MBP and when I added the Orbit into the equation (using the -6db outs like you're planning to) it just helped me get to what I've been chasing so much faster. I don't even use the Silk on the Orbit, either. I really expected this to just be an incremental thing, but got a great deal on a used one so I figured it was worth a shot.
You'll really notice the difference when you mix into it. I remember listening to shootouts where they take a finished mix, bus out some stems into a summing mixer, and A/B it, and felt it was really subtle. It's when you bring up the faders from the start and can push elements into the sweet spot... that's the good stuff. Setting initial levels is a lot easier to me than it was purely ITB. It's like there's more latitude as to where you can set things instead of trying to pinpoint a razor-thin spot where things don't disappear or get too loud.
The -6db out is great feeding into the SB too. I find that the sweet spot of the Orbit then tends to be where the Silver Bullet likes to be (roughly between 0db to +10db on the meter on average).
Of course this is just my experience but I hope you have fun with your new Orbit and report back once you get a chance to mess around with it!
Shaun
|
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 14, 2022 13:04:48 GMT -6
I just wanted to share my two cents that I got an Orbit a few months ago and was genuinely surprised at how big of a difference it made. I also have a Silver Bullet and MBP and when I added the Orbit into the equation (using the -6db outs like you're planning to) it just helped me get to what I've been chasing so much faster. I don't even use the Silk on the Orbit, either. I really expected this to just be an incremental thing, but got a great deal on a used one so I figured it was worth a shot. You'll really notice the difference when you mix into it. I remember listening to shootouts where they take a finished mix, bus out some stems into a summing mixer, and A/B it, and felt it was really subtle. It's when you bring up the faders from the start and can push elements into the sweet spot... that's the good stuff. Setting initial levels is a lot easier to me than it was purely ITB. It's like there's more latitude as to where you can set things instead of trying to pinpoint a razor-thin spot where things don't disappear or get too loud. The -6db out is great feeding into the SB too. I find that the sweet spot of the Orbit then tends to be where the Silver Bullet likes to be (roughly between 0db to +10db on the meter on average). Of course this is just my experience but I hope you have fun with your new Orbit and report back once you get a chance to mess around with it! Shaun If I can ever figure out how to get the @#&*&^ MOTU stuff to work I'd happily tell you if I have the same experience! I'd go back to Apollo but I'm paying for the Orbit by selling the Apollo gear. Haha. I'll figure it out I'm sure, but man... |
|
|
|
Post by Pueblo Audio on Feb 14, 2022 14:00:22 GMT -6
Have an Orbit on the way. Originally I was gonna run 16 outs from the DAW into the Orbit but maybe that defeats the purpose to some degree ("sum" degree?? get it??? sorry...) How are you all doing this? The Orbit may not have the same routing options as our SideWinder 32x8x2 Summing Matrix has. However, on our webpage there are a number of illustrated examples which may help you plan a good routing scheme. Take a look here... puebloaudio.com/sidewinder.html |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 14, 2022 15:26:47 GMT -6
Have an Orbit on the way. Originally I was gonna run 16 outs from the DAW into the Orbit but maybe that defeats the purpose to some degree ("sum" degree?? get it??? sorry...) How are you all doing this? The Orbit may not have the same routing options as our SideWinder 32x8x2 Summing Matrix has. However, on our webpage there are a number of illustrated examples which may help you plan a good routing scheme. Take a look here... puebloaudio.com/sidewinder.htmlVery helpful. And great product from the looks of it. I know from other posts that you're quite particular about the stuff that matters and also not afraid to say what doesn't matter. Where do you stand on "hardware as a DAW insert" VS "do all plugins first, send it to hardware chain last"? Assume that the first is a much easier workflow for me, is the second worth the sonic benefit in your opinion? |
|
|
|
Post by Pueblo Audio on Feb 25, 2022 15:15:58 GMT -6
The Orbit may not have the same routing options as our SideWinder 32x8x2 Summing Matrix has. However, on our webpage there are a number of illustrated examples which may help you plan a good routing scheme. Take a look here... puebloaudio.com/sidewinder.htmlVery helpful. And great product from the looks of it. I know from other posts that you're quite particular about the stuff that matters and also not afraid to say what doesn't matter. Where do you stand on "hardware as a DAW insert" VS "do all plugins first, send it to hardware chain last"? Assume that the first is a much easier workflow for me, is the second worth the sonic benefit in your opinion? I feel there is a related, broader and more helpful question lurking here. Maybe the heart of this question is really about generational losses. As with images, video, even cooking, great sonics are perishable. Even in the digital domain. With each transformation and replication, something must be lost. There is no virtual world; only the real world where entropy rules. When we are fortunate to record a performance along with a sound that has “IT", then that’s gold! But as that signal traverses all the subsequent production routing, processing, mix down, mastering, codecs, distribution and final consumer reproduction… that’s a lot of accumulated loss. Will we still have “IT” in the end? One thing that helps is to minimize the transformations we ourselves can control so that “IT” has a better chance to survive. Sounding great at tracking means nothing if it’s poo poo to the person who just bought the $90 LP Vinyl set! Doing as much as we can, in fewer steps, helps. Using hardware as daw inserts may be acceptable one time, but that’s not the usual discipline. In contrast, summing OoTB with an excellent summing unit with all the analog processing in place, then processed in one move, will have the better engineering advantage, I think. |
|
