|
Post by swurveman on Nov 17, 2016 11:29:58 GMT -6
What's going on with the Sigma mix? It's very different than the DAW mix. There is some sort of HP filter set very high compared to the DAW mix. The ass end drops out of the Sigma mix compared to the DAW mix. It's especially obvious in the vocal. Something isn't set right with this. One thing is that the FX included darker reverbs that didn't translate the same on the Sigma mix. The other thing could be the API 2500/Smart C2 settings. Since I didn't have the settings written down I used an "all buttons at 12 O'clock" approach. So, I don't know how the transients were originally compressed. The vocal is also squashed more by the LA2A. I can't A/B the mixes (or haven't figured it out) while I'm mixing through Sigma because I'm using all the RME/Aurora outputs getting channels to Sigma and for monitoring. To monitor via Sigma I'm using the Ext In from Sigma to Cubase in the Cubase Control Room. This is the first time I've used the Cubase Control Room. So, there may be a way to monitor both, but I've been trying to focus less on learning-I've done way to much of that with Sigma as it is- and more on just listening to Sigma. If I can I'll post one more mix that I do in the Daw from the ground up and then stem it out to Sigma. That way all the hardware settings will be the same from the ground up. The problem is I have to reset all the outputs, re-patch to the hardware and all that takes time............... Sorry for not letting you guys get a clearer comparison.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Nov 17, 2016 11:38:57 GMT -6
Yeah, there must be something off with this new version. Sigma mix here sounds wimpy compared to the DAW mix.
What's your main goal from a summing mixer? From what I can tell, the big draw of the Sigma is that your DAW automation comes after your outboard. If that's the main draw for you, I think this is the only summing mixer on the market that does that.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Nov 17, 2016 11:45:22 GMT -6
Yeah, there must be something off with this new version. Sigma mix here sounds wimpy compared to the DAW mix. What's your main goal from a summing mixer? From what I can tell, the big draw of the Sigma is that your DAW automation comes after your outboard. If that's the main draw for you, I think this is the only summing mixer on the market that does that. All the Daw automation controls the Sigma analog channels. So yes, the automation is after the outboard. With all the hassles, I prefer the Sigma. I wish I had it for another month with it, but I'm not going to purchase it at this point.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Nov 17, 2016 11:55:50 GMT -6
The software is what has kept me away , so much potential! This is why we need a better DAW hardware interface standard, Hui is 20 years old ! What we can do with the DAW and Hardware is mind boggling, but the fact everybody has to right their own code make it work with everything else is the chokehold ! The funny thing is the live world has for the most part seen the advantage of everything talking to each other why can't we ! As an aside at NAMM I begged Harrison to build their own take on this, they like Euphonix know digitally controlled analog mixers, unlike Euphonix/Avid they still build Analog!
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Nov 17, 2016 11:59:03 GMT -6
I'm thinking the same thing. Yes, the Sigma mix is more transparent, with better stereo separation, and the DAW mix seems veiled in comparison, but the Sigma mix is either revealing shortcomings in the mix, which is too thin and bright, or the Sigma's doing something wrong. In this case, I'd use the DAW mix and just brighten it up a little, like with a Clariphonic or better yet, a Massive Passive plug. One of the problems is that the reverbs are not being heard in the Sigma mix. I don't know why since I sent all the FX to a stereo Sigma channel at unity gain in the DAW. Listen to the snare in the DAW mix and you can hear the decay that's not in the Sigma mix. The same is true for all the reverbs. I used a Bricasti Chamber on the vocal, but you can't hear it much in the Sigma Mix. The post I replied to indiehouse spells out some problems in trying to recreate the two mixes to sound more alike due to compression settings and monitoring. But I was asked not to touch anything inside the DAW. So, what you hear is the same DAW mix with different compression settings. The only thing that I changed was the guitar levels and that's because when setting up Sigma I inadvertently disconnected the outputs from the DAW audio channels to the group channel that got sent to sigma. So, I tweaked those levels a bit.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Nov 17, 2016 12:03:11 GMT -6
The software is what has kept me away , so much potential! This is why we need a better DAW hardware interface standard, Hui is 20 years old ! What we can do with the DAW and Hardware is mind boggling, but the fact everybody has to right their own code make it work with everything else is the chokehold ! The funny thing is the live world has for the most part seen the advantage of everything talking to each other why can't we ! As an aside at NAMM I begged Harrison to build their own take on this, they like Euphonix know digitally controlled analog mixers, unlike Euphonix/Avid they still build Analog! I was warned of software troubles by the guy I buy my gear from, but I'm glad I demoed it anyway. I would be interested in a product that integrated the DAW-conversion-audio interface-analog summing in one seamless solution if possible. Dealing with three channels levels-Cubase-Totalmix-Sigma is a hassle, particularly when troubleshooting.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Nov 17, 2016 12:12:16 GMT -6
What I'm hearing is EQ related. It's definitely not reverb and compression settings that's jumping out at me. It's like someone set a HP filter on some or all of the tracks. Is pretty obvious on the vocal. It's like filter is set to 5 or 600 or something crazy high. I'd figure that out first. Are you using any outboard EQ? I have no idea how the sigma works, but if the outputs aren't lining up, maybe you think you're sending a guitar track out through a particular hardware chain, but in reality it's the vocal that's getting sent. I dunno. Just spit balling here.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Nov 17, 2016 12:21:32 GMT -6
The software is what has kept me away , so much potential! This is why we need a better DAW hardware interface standard, Hui is 20 years old ! What we can do with the DAW and Hardware is mind boggling, but the fact everybody has to right their own code make it work with everything else is the chokehold ! The funny thing is the live world has for the most part seen the advantage of everything talking to each other why can't we ! As an aside at NAMM I begged Harrison to build their own take on this, they like Euphonix know digitally controlled analog mixers, unlike Euphonix/Avid they still build Analog! I was warned of software troubles by the guy I buy my gear from, but I'm glad I demoed it anyway. I would be interested in a product that integrated the DAW-conversion-audio interface-analog summing in one seamless solution if possible. Dealing with three channels levels-Cubase-Totalmix-Sigma is a hassle, particularly when troubleshooting. Yeah that's part of why we need a standard to help us not have 3 mixers going on top of each other!
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Nov 17, 2016 13:24:45 GMT -6
The software is what has kept me away , so much potential! This is why we need a better DAW hardware interface standard, Hui is 20 years old ! What we can do with the DAW and Hardware is mind boggling, but the fact everybody has to right their own code make it work with everything else is the chokehold ! The funny thing is the live world has for the most part seen the advantage of everything talking to each other why can't we ! As an aside at NAMM I begged Harrison to build their own take on this, they like Euphonix know digitally controlled analog mixers, unlike Euphonix/Avid they still build Analog! I was warned of software troubles by the guy I buy my gear from, but I'm glad I demoed it anyway. I would be interested in a product that integrated the DAW-conversion-audio interface-analog summing in one seamless solution if possible. Dealing with three channels levels-Cubase-Totalmix-Sigma is a hassle, particularly when troubleshooting. My Midas VeniceF-32 is an all in one solution, but I wouldn't recommend picking up a firewire equipped unit in 2016.
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Nov 18, 2016 2:20:33 GMT -6
I still don't understand why you are seeeking a summing mixer. Your DAW mixes are better and more balanced from what has been posted. I knit the sigma is new to you so I am not disqualifying the learning experience and workflow difference. Are you trying to incorporate a bunch of outboard with out continuous AD/ DA loops? Do you just want a summing mixer? Automation after HW compression is easy in PT, simply automate volume parameter. It's the same with parallel compression, however I don't know if you use PT though. I am pretty positive any DAW can perform post insert automation.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Nov 18, 2016 12:11:37 GMT -6
I'm always interested in finding ways to improve my mixes. So , having never used a Summing Mixer and curious about the sound I thought I'd try the Sigma.
Though the bugginess of Sigma made it difficult, I liked the sound compared to my DAW . I'm going to demo some other Summing mixers and I'm also looking at the Cranesong Hedd and/or other color devices, I'd rather try gear and decide than make a judgement on all Summing Mixers and other sound options based on this one experience.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Nov 18, 2016 12:36:00 GMT -6
I still don't understand why you are seeeking a summing mixer. Your DAW mixes are better and more balanced from what has been posted. I knit the sigma is new to you so I am not disqualifying the learning experience and workflow difference. Are you trying to incorporate a bunch of outboard with out continuous AD/ DA loops? Do you just want a summing mixer? Automation after HW compression is easy in PT, simply automate volume parameter. It's the same with parallel compression, however I don't know if you use PT though. I am pretty positive any DAW can perform post insert automation. I'm not sure we're at a place where we can make judgements about the sound of the Sigma compared to DAW yet. I don't think we've sorted the issue causing the Sigma to sound radically different.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Nov 18, 2016 12:40:52 GMT -6
I'm always interested in finding ways to improve my mixes. So , having never used a Summing Mixer and curious about the sound I thought I'd try the Sigma. Though the bugginess of Sigma made it difficult, I liked the sound compared to my DAW . I'm going to demo some other Summing mixers and I'm also looking at the Cranesong Hedd and/or other color devices, I'd rather try gear and decide than make a judgement on all Summing Mixers and other sound options based on this one experience. If I was going to try summing mixers, I'd start with the Rsacal Tonebuss. Always heard that was a good piece. I think I've read enough polarizing opinions on summing to keep me away for the time being. If you're looking for color, try the Silver Bullet. I just picked one up second hand a month ago and I'm really digging it. Solid purchase. Really glad I gave it a shot. Brad's got a black void corp edition that just looks totally rad.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Nov 18, 2016 12:54:27 GMT -6
I'm always interested in finding ways to improve my mixes. So , having never used a Summing Mixer and curious about the sound I thought I'd try the Sigma. Though the bugginess of Sigma made it difficult, I liked the sound compared to my DAW . I'm going to demo some other Summing mixers and I'm also looking at the Cranesong Hedd and/or other color devices, I'd rather try gear and decide than make a judgement on all Summing Mixers and other sound options based on this one experience. If I was going to try summing mixers, I'd start with the Rsacal Tonebuss. Always heard that was a good piece. I think I've read enough polarizing opinions on summing to keep me away for the time being. If you're looking for color, try the Silver Bullet. I just picked one up second hand a month ago and I'm really digging it. Solid purchase. Really glad I gave it a shot. Brad's got a black void corp edition that just looks totally rad. Interestingly , my dealer who warned me about Sigma's software bugs just suggested the Tonebus to demo. I was thinking more towards the Neve 8816 , because I've enjoyed sound samples I've heard, but I think I'm gonna check out the Tonebus demo. Thanks for your opinion.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Nov 19, 2016 12:34:24 GMT -6
You have to decide do I want a summing mixer or a summing box? Very different animals in approach and work flow! I also see in your problems of dealing with mixer on top of mixer the huge advantage of PTHD that I always forget.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Nov 19, 2016 13:04:14 GMT -6
You have to decide do I want a summing mixer or a summing box? Very different animals in approach and work flow! I also see in your problems of dealing with mixer on top of mixer the huge advantage of PTHD that I always forget. For the large premium I'd pay Avid getting a 32 i/o PTHD system compared to my two Aurora 16's and two RME AES32's I can live with the mixer. :-)
|
|
|
Post by gregwurth on Feb 8, 2017 21:44:47 GMT -6
I still like the DAW mix the let's ride Bg vox in the first hook are over powering in the sigma mix, whereas in the DAW mix they are blended nicely. The sigma mix the guitar is louder in the right monitor thannin the DAW mix. Are you sure you have the same pan law setup? It's like the sigma isn't compensating for the hard panned elements. I also still think the sigma mix is louder than the DAW mix. I feel the lead guitar in the beginning of the solo doesn't stand out as much on the DAW mix, the hard panned guitars are kinda dwarfing it. The sigma mix the solo starts off louder and grabs the attention better. I think the snare is punchier on the DAW mix. Overall these are close, however i still prefer the DAW mix. I am sorry you have had so many issues with this product functioning as advertised. I really appreciate you taking the time tomorovide real world feedback and your experience with this product. This will be a great asset for those looking into this piece of gear and this type of workflow. What is the DAW mix missing that you feel you need a sigma or summing mixer? Have you looked at any other summing mixers? That Greg Wurth Oracle looks insane, also a lot of users are in love with the new Dangerous 2 bus plus.. My ears were burning.... Speaking of the this SSL unit, Barry Rudolph who is a Sigma user has done a nice review of The Oracle. You can check it out here www.barryrudolph.com/newtoys/toys17/greg_wurth_oracle.html
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Feb 8, 2017 22:01:03 GMT -6
I still like the DAW mix the let's ride Bg vox in the first hook are over powering in the sigma mix, whereas in the DAW mix they are blended nicely. The sigma mix the guitar is louder in the right monitor thannin the DAW mix. Are you sure you have the same pan law setup? It's like the sigma isn't compensating for the hard panned elements. I also still think the sigma mix is louder than the DAW mix. I feel the lead guitar in the beginning of the solo doesn't stand out as much on the DAW mix, the hard panned guitars are kinda dwarfing it. The sigma mix the solo starts off louder and grabs the attention better. I think the snare is punchier on the DAW mix. Overall these are close, however i still prefer the DAW mix. I am sorry you have had so many issues with this product functioning as advertised. I really appreciate you taking the time tomorovide real world feedback and your experience with this product. This will be a great asset for those looking into this piece of gear and this type of workflow. What is the DAW mix missing that you feel you need a sigma or summing mixer? Have you looked at any other summing mixers? That Greg Wurth Oracle looks insane, also a lot of users are in love with the new Dangerous 2 bus plus.. My ears were burning.... Speaking of the this SSL unit, Barry Rudolph who is a Sigma user has done a nice review of The Oracle. You can check it out here www.barryrudolph.com/newtoys/toys17/greg_wurth_oracle.htmlGreg a box like yours is what makes me want a more versatile Sigma like box ! I want the software & control options to use it like logos build auxes and busses or as a level and pan box to drive a tone monster summing box! Maybe I'll have enough saved enough by the time they realize the potential and do something about it!
|
|