Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2017 6:21:15 GMT -6
sites.fastspring.com/harrisonconsoles/product/mixbus32c?coupon=3-Days-OnlyIt is a great offer, this is the big version with the full 32C EQ, 12 busses etc... You will get the upgrade to Version 4 NOT for free, because only Mixbus 3 / 32C FULL PRICE purchases of this month do. Still, this is the full-fledged thing for less than typical update/upgrade prices of other DAWs... I can only recommend it. Great chance to start with Mixbus. EDIT: UPGRADE-INFORMATION
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2017 6:40:08 GMT -6
sites.fastspring.com/harrisonconsoles/product/mixbus32c?coupon=3-Days-OnlyIt is a great offer, this is the big version with the full 32C EQ, 12 busses etc... You will get the upgrade to Version 4 NOT for free, because only Mixbus 3 / 32C FULL PRICE purchases of this month do. Still, this is the full-fledged thing for less than typical update/upgrade prices of other DAWs... I can only recommend it. Great chance to start with Mixbus. EDIT: UPGRADE-INFORMATION Crazy cheap for what this can do. I've got version 3, but not 32c, and have just played a bit running stems through it.It definitely adds something nice! How much more useful is the 4 band eq? Is it still a bit finicky with 3rd party plugs? I still edit in Reaper as can't get my head around another DAW atm., do you do all your editing etc with this? Sorry for the many questions lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2017 6:47:34 GMT -6
The 32C is worth the switch from the small Mixbus 3. The EQ is crazy good. A lot more versatile of course, but also an even better analog style emulation IMO. Also, the whole channel and bus emulation is better. Yes, it really sounds better to me than the already great Mixbus 3. I also hesitated to switch to 32C from Mixbus 3, but i do not regret. Got it also in a sale like this and it was a great purchase. OK, in March the update to Ver. 4 comes, but even with update price added, there is a good chance you still save some bucks. And you can wait with the update until you are familiar with 32C to see if you think it is worth it... Up to now, Mixbus is so affordable, that i step by step bought additional LV2 plugins from them, and never regretted a sale purchase.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2017 6:50:20 GMT -6
Right now, i edit mostly in Sonar, because i use it a lot for content creation and import the tracks in Mixbus. But i see they have put work into the editing part of Mixbus for the Version 4 updates, so i will get them. I would like to edit more right in Mixbus, and so far, it has not been too complicated, IMO the learning curve is quite shallow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2017 7:16:30 GMT -6
OK, plugin compatibility... AFAIK Harrison does implement the interfaces to exact specification, so, it is possible that NOT all plugins load flawlessly. Often, because the plugins have a problem or don't work fully up the the interfaces specs. In the meantime, i also have found a plugin, that made problems in Sonar, but works flawlessly in Mixbus. And the Sonar VST implementation is quite good. As for plugins - Harrison will not build a bitbridge, they only support 64bit plugins. I did not check it, but i think VST3 is also not implemented right now, but don't nail me on this. Fact is - i rarely use 3rd party plugins in the meantime. I use AD2 and Jamstix for drum bus stuff, Mixbus sounds great for creating drum tracks. Some other VST2 64bit plugins, like Klanghelm stuff. I can say nothing about Waves, Slate and iLok based plugins. Because i don't use any of it. BTW, i am on Win 8.1. What i do in the meantime, is, that i purchased some of Harrisons own LV2 plugins, and up to now, i was not disappointed with any of them. Right now, i have the Essentials bundle (Verb and Echo), the Mastering EQ, the Spectral Compressor, the De-Esser, my next purchase will most probably be the character bundle. The idea of the character EQs seems very useful to me, quite an intelligent idea...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 8:38:41 GMT -6
Addendum for plugin compatibility workarounds: If you really need a plugin to load, but it does not in Mixbus, e.g. because it is 32bit or any other obstacle, you can always try to load it with a wrapper like jBridge or a container plugin app for vst-stacks that builds up a layer between the critical plugin and Mixbus. Don't know about choices for Mac and PC, just tried jBuilder and worked for many plugs. But as said, i rarely *need* to use a specific plugin, and what i use mostly works out of the box... Using wrappers has also been recommended to me by Ben from Harrison for the problematical plugins, there is a good chance it works with a diffenrently coded plugin loader function...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 8:57:35 GMT -6
And a last one that might be important for editing tasks in Mixbus. The version 4 in march will have a new feature that i am really looking forward to. They implemented a Lua-based scripting engine. I guess this makes wide parts of Mixbus automatable in a virtuelly near unlimited manner with a widely used standard scripting language that is quite versatile. This is one of the most useful things i oftenly miss in DAWs or it is there, but undocumented or handled like a "legacy" thing nobody needs. In Sonar there is such a scripting language, that is not documented anyhow, except with "example scripts" and some old external webpage. And i really need such functions like "spread the different midi channels of track x into seperate tracks starting from Track y but leave out channels without content" or you can guess how interesting and effective individual export-scripts would be, if you need some custom works to be done to each exported track and many other useful possibilities. According to Harrison, the scripting engine will have such powerful interface to Mixbus functionality that it would even be possibility to write your own MIDI processors, think of custom MiDI-plugin functionality. Really looking forward to it. And since the Mixbus community is widely a "non-nonsense" type of guys i expect there will be a lot of useful stuff be shared in the form of scripts for everyday tasks...
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Feb 12, 2017 9:47:44 GMT -6
I have a question...
Is it compatible with the Avid/Digidesign C|24? I have been holding on to mine for dear life because I just love how quickly I can work on it... and it's ethernet interface to my Mac Pro, and everything works hunky dory.
If I can control 32C with it, I am totally in!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 11:25:00 GMT -6
I have a question... Is it compatible with the Avid/Digidesign C|24? I have been holding on to mine for dear life because I just love how quickly I can work on it... and it's ethernet interface to my Mac Pro, and everything works hunky dory. If I can control 32C with it, I am totally in! I can totally understand this would be a great thing with the C24 as a controller. BUT There is a 99.9% chance it never will. With ANYTHING other but Protools below 12. The C24 communicate via a highly proprietary ethernet protocol that never has been exposed of re-engineered. It is up to now incompatible to any other DAW. It does speak non of the protocols other DAWs understand, not EuCon, not HUI, not MCU, not LC, not OSC, nothing. Making it work with anything outside protools would take a guy willing to analyze the ethernet protocol (re-engineering) and translate it with a software to any of the standard control surface languages. To my knowledge nobody ever did. Avid never published anything about how it works. Seems like they want it to die in EOL instead of beeing opened to be of use with anything else. Which is a shame, because it is an expensive and obviously nice controller. Mixbus can use MIDI controller, OSC and Mackie protocols. The perfect surface at the moment is the Behringer X-Touch, which is the most complete integrated control surface, including channel strip lcd and everything. Sure - the C24 is another league, but blame it to avid that it is such a closed proprietary design and they seem not to be willing to publish the protocol ever.......... Sorry, but control surfaces are always a thing and there are even strange dialects to the existing widely used protocols that can be an obstacle. The C24 is something like a Black Box without documentation. It is a shame to restrict such a fine piece of controller and virtually render it more or less useless for the future. It most certainly would not take more than to publish their protocol paper, but seems they are not willing to do that ever.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 12, 2017 11:30:25 GMT -6
Curious, how would this work for a Logic user like myself. I use some hardware for tracking, DAW for editing and plug-ins, but eventually hope to have analogue gear for my 2 bus mix, like the Stam SSL and a couple of EQP-1A's. Would I have to learn new editing and automating functions? I work fairly quickly when automating in Logic now.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 12, 2017 11:31:54 GMT -6
Man, I've avoided because I just haven't wanted to buy yet another daw. So - you really feel like here's a sonic difference? I've been summing through the dbox and printing the file and exporting...so is there really any point to use mixbus?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 11:43:47 GMT -6
Man, I've avoided because I just haven't wanted to buy yet another daw. So - you really feel like here's a sonic difference? I've been summing through the dbox and printing the file and exporting...so is there really any point to use mixbus? In fact, Mixbus is the only DAW to my knowldge, that in itself is a fully quality mixing desk emulation and therefore really does a sonic difference. Think of the channel strip like a complex plugin and the busses as complex plugins and everything perfectly matched in gainstaging and all. You will notice the difference to clean DAWs immediately even if you just do summing without EQs or Filters or Tape Emu or dynamics angaged at all. Ask anybody using it. Never read that anyone said he did not hear the difference. But even more useful is the mixer layout that is slick as can be like an analog desk and allows as quick mixing decisions and hands-on feel. One knob per function as much as possible. Forget menus in the mixer view....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 11:49:49 GMT -6
Curious, how would this work for a Logic user like myself. I use some hardware for tracking, DAW for editing and plug-ins, but eventually hope to have analogue gear for my 2 bus mix, like the Stam SSL and a couple of EQP-1A's. Would I have to learn new editing and automating functions? I work fairly quickly when automating in Logic now. I am not familiar with Logic, so i can not really say how much of a change it will be for you. There are a lot of systematic tutorial videos in youtube, the manual is short, complete and no-nonsense. The learning curve IMHO is shallow, most probably it does not matter what DAW you come from. Many pro functions that not every DAW has. PS: Hardware insert in the 2-bus should be no problem at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 11:56:04 GMT -6
Harrison has demo versions online for some time due to the high demand, so you can get a quick glimpse to see, if you think you could work yourself into it. See here for vids and demo. harrisonconsoles.com/site/mixbus-info.htmlBtw, i want to make clear, that i am in no way affiliated with Harrison, i am just a user.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 12, 2017 12:58:18 GMT -6
Just downloaded the demo...this is gonna take a while to figure out
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 13:32:01 GMT -6
If you are all about the sonics and the mixing desk exploring, import the tracks of an existing project of yours, which is pretty straight forward, and press play. Experience the mixing desk feeling remixing it. Listen. The easiest way to see, if you like it's sonics and UI feel. You hardly need a manual for that and have a quick experience. Since people know their own mixes quite well most of the time, you can easily find the difference in sound, think of it like an analog console and you get into it fast. This is what i do most of the time, using it just as a digital console with analog handling and sound.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 13:48:33 GMT -6
The most bizarre thing about it is the initial window setting up your audio card - after that it's just lovely saturation ....
|
|
|
Post by winetree on Feb 12, 2017 15:15:15 GMT -6
+1 to all the above. I've been working on a Harrison console for the last 40 years to 2" tape. I'd mix and master to Soundtools II with high end converters. So I wasn't a digital newbe. So when I set up the digital control room, I bypassed all the other D.A.W. s ( I had used some of the others ) and went for Mixbus. I found Mixbus intuitive to my analog workflow and sound. It's been my secret weapon for mixing Until now that the cat's been let out of the bag. The 32c is great. Signed A long time Harrison user.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 12, 2017 15:45:44 GMT -6
So are you guys tracking in other DAWS and mixing in this? I just opened the demo for 10 minutes...Can you not use third party plugs?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 16:01:17 GMT -6
So are you guys tracking in other DAWS and mixing in this? I just opened the demo for 10 minutes...Can you not use third party plugs? You can. In the track view window, got to the menu, "Edit", "Settings", "Plugins". I am on windows, so i do not know how it looks on a Mac, but you find the path setting and whatever is needed to setup 3rd party plugins and a scan function.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 16:09:20 GMT -6
I used to track with Sonar and create synth tracks there etc.. Last time i was tracking female voice and lost a take due to a crash to desktop. A long and good take. Man, i was pissed off. I guess i WILL track critical stuff in Mixbus in future. It is as straight forward as in other DAWs and i trust Harrison and the open source community of Ardour to be able to guarantee a more stable and reliable operation especially for recording... And i might go back to Linux, could be an even more suitable OS for stable and reliable tracking operation.
|
|
|
Post by winetree on Feb 12, 2017 18:52:41 GMT -6
I track and mix in Mixbus on a Mac when I'm recording in the digital Control Room. Otherwise The analog C.R. has the Harrison console, 2", or Radar V Nyquest 24/96.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 16, 2017 11:38:32 GMT -6
Well, shit...I missed out...
|
|
|
Post by malkit on Feb 16, 2017 11:57:56 GMT -6
Well, shit...I missed out... A little birdy told me that this may not be the last offer of this nature, sir.
;->
After picking up two kush electracs and a carteq feq-5, I had to bend my credit card a little- but luckily managed to get in just before the door closed.
Thanks for the heads up, Smalls.
I use mainly ableton and logic, so it will be interesting to see how this integrates.
The manual is probably one of the nicer / user-friendlier ones I've come across in the field. Much more readable than other any other DAW's, so already a step ahead.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 16, 2017 12:43:11 GMT -6
Just did a quick recording of acoustic and then in Cubase. There does seem to be a little more clarity on top...They're two different takes, so take that for what it's worth. Well...maybe...
|
|