|
Post by jin167 on Aug 29, 2016 8:04:32 GMT -6
At the moment I am using a hybrid system (protools + hardware) and it works most of the time but whenever I try to do parallel processing I run into a phase issue... I've set my hardware insert delay as accurately as the system will allow me (1/100 of a ms) but even then there are some issues. Is there a good way to get around this problem? I'm not using a console and I don't intend to so I might have to use a device that allows me to do parallel processing in analog domain but most of the options that I had a look at costs a small fortune ($600 and up)
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,943
|
Post by ericn on Aug 29, 2016 8:40:54 GMT -6
At the moment I am using a hybrid system (protools + hardware) and it works most of the time but whenever I try to do parallel processing I run into a phase issue... I've set my hardware insert delay as accurately as the system will allow me (1/100 of a ms) but even then there are some issues. Is there a good way to get around this problem? I'm not using a console and I don't intend to so I might have to use a device that allows me to do parallel processing in analog domain but most of the options that I had a look at costs a small fortune ($600 and up) OK I never sold an in the box rig without a mixer, and more and more of the pros I know who went completely ITB have added small mixers, not as summing but as general problem solvers. You don't need a console but a little Mackie can sure help out, hell a Little Behringer lives on my bench just cause in one stupid little box I have level matching headphone amp and some routing! Now a box like the little labs IBP or what ever the Radial phase alignment box is will do what you want, but man I'll tell you try adding a little mixer to your rig and see how much easier audio life in general becomes!
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Aug 29, 2016 8:44:18 GMT -6
At the moment I am using a hybrid system (protools + hardware) and it works most of the time but whenever I try to do parallel processing I run into a phase issue... I've set my hardware insert delay as accurately as the system will allow me (1/100 of a ms) but even then there are some issues. Is there a good way to get around this problem? I'm not using a console and I don't intend to so I might have to use a device that allows me to do parallel processing in analog domain but most of the options that I had a look at costs a small fortune ($600 and up) OK I never sold an in the box rig without a mixer, and more and more of the pros I know who went completely ITB have added small mixers, not as summing but as general problem solvers. You don't need a console but a little Mackie can sure help out, hell a Little Behringer lives on my bench just cause in one stupid little box I have level matching headphone amp and some routing! Now a box like the little labs IBP or what ever the Radial phase alignment box is will do what you want, but man I'll tell you try adding a little mixer to your rig and see how much easier audio life in general becomes! +1 And I say if you use it for summing too you will be faster as ever before with your mixes.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Aug 29, 2016 8:50:50 GMT -6
At the moment I am using a hybrid system (protools + hardware) and it works most of the time but whenever I try to do parallel processing I run into a phase issue... I've set my hardware insert delay as accurately as the system will allow me (1/100 of a ms) but even then there are some issues. Is there a good way to get around this problem? I'm not using a console and I don't intend to so I might have to use a device that allows me to do parallel processing in analog domain but most of the options that I had a look at costs a small fortune ($600 and up) Hmmm....should I be concerned with phase issues when processing let's say a snare top mic running out to an analog 1176 with the snare bottom mic staying ITB?
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Aug 29, 2016 10:50:05 GMT -6
At the moment I am using a hybrid system (protools + hardware) and it works most of the time but whenever I try to do parallel processing I run into a phase issue... I've set my hardware insert delay as accurately as the system will allow me (1/100 of a ms) but even then there are some issues. Is there a good way to get around this problem? I'm not using a console and I don't intend to so I might have to use a device that allows me to do parallel processing in analog domain but most of the options that I had a look at costs a small fortune ($600 and up) Hmmm....should I be concerned with phase issues when processing let's say a snare top mic running out to an analog 1176 with the snare bottom mic staying ITB? Not if you are using inserts with delay compensation. The only time it can get funny is with inserts on busses. If your using compression, it changes time/phase anyway so not a huge deal. If it sounds good, it is good.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Aug 29, 2016 14:58:34 GMT -6
At the moment I am using a hybrid system (protools + hardware) and it works most of the time but whenever I try to do parallel processing I run into a phase issue... I've set my hardware insert delay as accurately as the system will allow me (1/100 of a ms) but even then there are some issues. Is there a good way to get around this problem? I'm not using a console and I don't intend to so I might have to use a device that allows me to do parallel processing in analog domain but most of the options that I had a look at costs a small fortune ($600 and up) Hmmm....should I be concerned with phase issues when processing let's say a snare top mic running out to an analog 1176 with the snare bottom mic staying ITB? In theory ..... no... In Theory. In practice, anything thats part of a phase aligned audio family, I do all at once. If you must do it.. or solve the problem as best you can as you described above.. I would use a single sample "tick" of audio. and place it on the tracks you are going to send out at the end of the track. Do the recording and then manually drag the recorded track back in time,so its sample accurate. Actually, this is why I ended up heading off down the console route. I wanted to process more than one track at a time out of the box...and eventually wanted to do 6 tracks at a time, so I could "Reamp" all my drums at once... Then ... things grew and sort of got out of hand... 8). I personally don't think OTB summing gives me anything "better " (wow, going crazy not the quotes this morning 8) ........ ) than what ITB does. How I work is I track, then I reamp, then I mix. cheers Wiz
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Aug 29, 2016 15:11:11 GMT -6
Hmmm....should I be concerned with phase issues when processing let's say a snare top mic running out to an analog 1176 with the snare bottom mic staying ITB? In theory ..... no... In Theory. In practice, anything thats part of a phase aligned audio family, I do all at once. If you must do it.. or solve the problem as best you can as you described above.. I would use a single sample "tick" of audio. and place it on the tracks you are going to send out at the end of the track. Do the recording and then manually drag the recorded track back in time,so its sample accurate. Actually, this is why I ended up heading off down the console route. I wanted to process more than one track at a time out of the box...and eventually wanted to do 6 tracks at a time, so I could "Reamp" all my drums at once... Then ... things grew and sort of got out of hand... 8). I personally don't think OTB summing gives me anything "better " (wow, going crazy not the quotes this morning 8) ........ ) than what ITB does. How I work is I track, then I reamp, then I mix. cheers Wiz So, you'd buss the snare top and snare bottom and send that out to a compressor? Didn't mulmany just comment that things get funny when using inserts on busses? Ha! I didn't think I had a problem with using my outboard until I started reading this thread. I'm using more and more outboard, and want to be sure I'm not creating problems. Generally, I'll mix by using inserts. I'll usually print the final 2-buss while using outboard inserts on various tracks. I don't print outboard tracks unless I need to free up a piece for another track.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Aug 29, 2016 15:31:58 GMT -6
In theory ..... no... In Theory. In practice, anything thats part of a phase aligned audio family, I do all at once. If you must do it.. or solve the problem as best you can as you described above.. I would use a single sample "tick" of audio. and place it on the tracks you are going to send out at the end of the track. Do the recording and then manually drag the recorded track back in time,so its sample accurate. Actually, this is why I ended up heading off down the console route. I wanted to process more than one track at a time out of the box...and eventually wanted to do 6 tracks at a time, so I could "Reamp" all my drums at once... Then ... things grew and sort of got out of hand... 8). I personally don't think OTB summing gives me anything "better " (wow, going crazy not the quotes this morning 8) ........ ) than what ITB does. How I work is I track, then I reamp, then I mix. cheers Wiz So, you'd buss the snare top and snare bottom and send that out to a compressor? Didn't mulmany just comment that things get funny when using inserts on busses? Ha! I didn't think I had a problem with using my outboard until I started reading this thread. I'm using more and more outboard, and want to be sure I'm not creating problems. Generally, I'll mix by using inserts. I'll usually print the final 2-buss while using outboard inserts on various tracks. I don't print outboard tracks unless I need to free up a piece for another track. Well, i use Logic Pro X ,and it has some things going on with delay compensation and how you route.. and that would be different for each daw I am guessing. How I do it in Logic Pro X I set up the IO plug in on each drum track. each drum track is routed to a seperate input and output of my Motu 16A via the IO plug in... the MOTU 16A and the mixer are physically connected to each other, and the mixer inserts are connected to patch bays. Comps etc get inserted via patch bay. I ping each IO plug in and each one ends up having the same latency... I then route the output of each drum track channel, in Logic to its own bus. Then I create a new audio track for each bus I just created and set the input of those to corresponding bus. Then I put those tracks in record... Then I record . So the chain is Drum track > IO Plug in > Bus > New Audio Track The way logic works, this gives me sample accurate ramps. Then I take notes of what the outward was set to... and mute and hide the original track (I can always go back and reamp if I have to... for example making the last album, I didn't go back to an original track after reamping once.. so its becoming redundant to keep them) I have set up template that has all this set up for me.. I always name re amped tracks in CAPITALS.... so they are easy to see... e.g. snare.. vs SNARE. hope that helps... cheers Wiz
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Aug 29, 2016 17:29:15 GMT -6
Wiz covered the best way to keep outboard tracks aligned, if you are printing.
Indiehouse, you are on PT correct?
I did a bunch of tests in PT with my Motu 16a and the delay compensation. There are one or two ways they get you in trouble, and one way that allows PT to run the calculations correctly for busses. I actually found a good video from Avid on proper implementation. I will see if I can find it.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Aug 29, 2016 17:46:27 GMT -6
If it's just one track just duplicate the track, insert a compressor on the duplicated track and blend it. Same thing, isn't it? Instead of sending the original track to another channel with a compressor on it, you just duplicate it and compress the second track. On the other hand, you'd need multiple compressors if you had to do this with multiple tracks.
There are some things that a console is just better for.
The weird thing (unless I'm mistaken) is that all the high quality desks in the somewhat affordable range (API 1608, Neve 5088) don't have many channels to do the very thing that most people want a desk for the most. If you did what Vance did with his board-mult out the two snares and send it to three different compressors in parallel/then compile them back onto one track- it takes up a lot of real estate if I'm not mistaken.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Aug 29, 2016 18:25:27 GMT -6
If it's just one track just duplicate the track, insert a compressor on the duplicated track and blend it. Same thing, isn't it? Instead of sending the original track to another channel with a compressor on it, you just duplicate it and compress the second track. On the other hand, you'd need multiple compressors if you had to do this with multiple tracks. There are some things that a console is just better for. The weird thing (unless I'm mistaken) is that all the high quality desks in the somewhat affordable range (API 1608, Neve 5088) don't have many channels to do the very thing that most people want a desk for the most. If you did what Vance did with his board-mult out the two snares and send it to three different compressors in parallel/then compile them back onto one track- it takes up a lot of real estate if I'm not mistaken. This is why a lot of cats cut on Neve or API (for the flavor) and mix on SSL (routing/flexibility).
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Aug 29, 2016 21:37:26 GMT -6
In theory ..... no... In Theory. In practice, anything thats part of a phase aligned audio family, I do all at once. If you must do it.. or solve the problem as best you can as you described above.. I would use a single sample "tick" of audio. and place it on the tracks you are going to send out at the end of the track. Do the recording and then manually drag the recorded track back in time,so its sample accurate. Actually, this is why I ended up heading off down the console route. I wanted to process more than one track at a time out of the box...and eventually wanted to do 6 tracks at a time, so I could "Reamp" all my drums at once... Then ... things grew and sort of got out of hand... 8). I personally don't think OTB summing gives me anything "better " (wow, going crazy not the quotes this morning 8) ........ ) than what ITB does. How I work is I track, then I reamp, then I mix. cheers Wiz So, you'd buss the snare top and snare bottom and send that out to a compressor? Didn't mulmany just comment that things get funny when using inserts on busses? Ha! I didn't think I had a problem with using my outboard until I started reading this thread. I'm using more and more outboard, and want to be sure I'm not creating problems. Generally, I'll mix by using inserts. I'll usually print the final 2-buss while using outboard inserts on various tracks. I don't print outboard tracks unless I need to free up a piece for another track. Use HW inserts in PT same output/ same input! Console App for Apollo has PT Mode which offsets the I/O so PT sees the correct I/O for HW Inserts, and by this PT sees the converter as a Avid converter and matches up the HW insert return. James Lugo has a vid showing in YT I will try to link, and I also do this every mix with my wa76 permanently patched to Line output/ input 5 and renamed in PT to wa76. So if you had a bus your "bus comp" would send out via line output 7-8 and return in line input 7-8 and this will be time aligned in PT Also, I use PT 10 still and functionality with HW has got much better in PT 12 with commit to track and Bounce in place. PT and Apollo setup for HW inserts PT HW insert vid in general
|
|
|
Post by jin167 on Aug 29, 2016 22:28:33 GMT -6
Compensating for HW delays in protools is easy enough to do and as I've mentioned I've set the HW delay compensation as accurately as the system will allow me (I've done the loop back test and compared the wave files and confirmed that they are perfectly aligned) but even then I can still hear some weird phase issues.. I do have a small format mixer and I guess I could use it to do parallel processing but then the problem is that when dealing with a stereo track I can't get a good L/R balance..
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Aug 29, 2016 22:51:17 GMT -6
Compensating for HW delay in protools is easy enough to do and as I've mentioned I've set the HW delay as accurately as the system will allow me (I've done the loop back test and compared the wave files and confirmed that they are perfectly aligned) but even then I can still hear some weird phase issues.. I do have a small format mixer and I guess I could use it to do parallel processing but then the problem is that when dealing with a stereo track I can't get a perfect L/R balance.. There is the rub.... still hear stuff. that happens to me to in Logic Pro X. I sometimes have weird outcomes.... I have theories on why, can't prove any of them. I have alleviated many of the issues.. buy doing things in certain ways... and double and triple checking... but its still the bug bear cheers Wiz
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Aug 30, 2016 8:59:12 GMT -6
If it's just one track just duplicate the track, insert a compressor on the duplicated track and blend it. Same thing, isn't it? Instead of sending the original track to another channel with a compressor on it, you just duplicate it and compress the second track. On the other hand, you'd need multiple compressors if you had to do this with multiple tracks. There are some things that a console is just better for. The weird thing (unless I'm mistaken) is that all the high quality desks in the somewhat affordable range (API 1608, Neve 5088) don't have many channels to do the very thing that most people want a desk for the most. If you did what Vance did with his board-mult out the two snares and send it to three different compressors in parallel/then compile them back onto one track- it takes up a lot of real estate if I'm not mistaken. This is why a lot of cats cut on Neve or API (for the flavor) and mix on SSL (routing/flexibility). For people without that kind of money, but who have high quality outboard preamps and hardware compressors and EQ's, the Audient ASP4816 does a helluva lot routing wise for a relatively inexpensive price point.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Aug 30, 2016 9:50:13 GMT -6
This is why a lot of cats cut on Neve or API (for the flavor) and mix on SSL (routing/flexibility). For people without that kind of money, but who have high quality outboard preamps and hardware compressors and EQ's, the Audient ASP4816 does a helluva lot routing wise for a relatively inexpensive price point. Yep, looks fairly nice, but it's lacking some features I would want. If/when I upgrade my desk, I want filters on all channels (if at all possible). This discontinued Spectra-T console seems to check all the marks I'm looking for... www.apb-dynasonics.com/Downloads/Spectra-2015-NEW-ADDRESS-022615-Discontinued.pdf
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Aug 30, 2016 10:39:28 GMT -6
For people without that kind of money, but who have high quality outboard preamps and hardware compressors and EQ's, the Audient ASP4816 does a helluva lot routing wise for a relatively inexpensive price point. Yep, looks fairly nice, but it's lacking some features I would want. If/when I upgrade my desk, I want filters on all channels (if at all possible). This discontinued Spectra-T console seems to check all the marks I'm looking for... www.apb-dynasonics.com/Downloads/Spectra-2015-NEW-ADDRESS-022615-Discontinued.pdfBummer that it's discontinued. Yeah, I guess you'd have to insert a hardware EQ for the Sub Groups. Reading the manual, they reference routing to the Sub Groups and using the Michael Brauer mixing technique. I believe he has a Compressor/EQ chain when he sends signals to them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2016 22:10:26 GMT -6
There are a couple of 500 series and rack mount versions for parallel processing in the analog domain that are handy in my world.
The TK Audio MB 1 mini blender for outboard and the Radial EXTC 500 for pedals.
Best of luck..
|
|