ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,937
|
Post by ericn on May 12, 2017 17:33:45 GMT -6
As we speak @johnkenn I have 72 outs from pro tools running in to about 60 line amps of varying brands and topologies, all being summed by different methods into busses, which are summed into a really f**king expensive summing unit which I paid a fortune for and then paid another fortune to mod to the teeth and now I'm spending my idle moments on the Purple Audio website looking at the MFtwenty5 system and Sweet 10 racks with Moin summing busses and blah blah blah blah BLAH.... I started with a D-Box. There's more to summing than just summing. I feel your pain. What a terrible business idea this all is๐ And it's noisy as hell and impossible to recall and always needs maintainance and I LOVE it. @johnkenn I am your father...come to the dark side. If your tired of that big old modded summing box you know where you can park it !๐
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 12, 2017 17:36:44 GMT -6
And then complain because it's only 8 channels...and then sell my Apollo and D-Box for another 16 channel interface and another summing mixer. Oh, and I need a new DA because I was using my Dbox for DA...Just don't know if I can justify the expense. Unfortunately, quality doesn't always translate into business in this business. Relationships seem to win the day. I'm going to go drink. Just get a board ! All that analog yummieness ! Dude...you've seen my room.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,937
|
Post by ericn on May 12, 2017 17:47:50 GMT -6
Just get a board ! All that analog yummieness ! Dude...you've seen my room. A little board would fit๐ Seriously all summing systems are mixers without features someone else thought you didn't need ! The only summing system I could see using is the discontinued API 8200/7600/7800 with some different Opamps and Iron! My gut says it went bye bye because someone figured out with an adapter cable it could be used to add inputs to a 1608 ! To much cash in that expander!
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on May 12, 2017 18:56:18 GMT -6
Dude...you've seen my room. A little board would fit๐ Seriously all summing systems are mixers without features someone else thought you didn't need ! The only summing system I could see using is the discontinued API 8200/7600/7800 with some different Opamps and Iron! My gut says it went bye bye because someone figured out with an adapter cable it could be used to add inputs to a 1608 ! To much cash in that expander! Purple Audio MFtwenty5 is worth a look. Also their sweet 10 rack with their Moyin module becomes an 8 channel summing mixer full of whatever modules you put in it. That Andrew over there is smart as F man. I am after some of that stuff now. Imagine a rack of 8 vp28s turned in to a summing mixer! Totally cascadeable and expandable a little at a time. Anyway... JK if you wanna try the sigma 500 I can send it to you to try out. You like it, you buy it. I ain't using them.
|
|
|
Post by BradM on May 12, 2017 19:37:20 GMT -6
Makes me pine for an analog console/router/mixer whatever that has channel inputs from the DAW that have the properties of preamps without EQ -with no inputs for tracking -that go to a master bus for processing and then a/d back into the DAW for print. Seems much simpler and I'm not sure why somebody hasn't done this. Seems like so many people have the front end they desire but not the back end. A little bird told me that there might be a plan for just that - an 8 channel summing unit with transformers and opamps on every channel. Then a master two bus. John, Throw in some direct outs to feed the DAW during tracking, and some aux sends so you can use it for setting up cue sends. Don't forget to add some features for controlling speaker and headphone levels for monitoring. Oh, I think having filters and maybe some EQ on each channel might be useful, too. I have the perfect name for such a product: CONSOLE!
Brad
|
|
|
Post by BradM on May 12, 2017 20:07:59 GMT -6
A 57 on snare into a Scully 280 vs a Neve 1073 or a Dukane 2A75 will all have different artifacts that you can highlight as the colors of these pieces of gear. As with all mic preamp there's a limit to how great they are at boosting before you're just amplifying noise. With any color you seek there's a sweet spot to gear, sometimes it doesn't require massive gain and sometimes it does. This is like comparing Kung Fu techniques, Crane vs Tiger. Everybody has differing approaches and opinions. My definition of color will be inadequate or irrelevant to you or somebody else. But in context with controlled parameters? Using a mic preamp to make up 45 db or so of gain with a passive summing mixer is not a way you'd normally incur any real "color." Not the obvious stuff. The sales pitch (part of it) for a passive summing mixer is that your mic preamp(s) is the source of color and you switch to get those colors. The output of a summing mixer isn't what I'd call the most robust level you'd send into a mic preamp if you're seeking some major difference. Color may include saturation or distortion as well. An under driven mic preamp typically won't accomplish that. This is what I was referring to. In general this ain't the way to go. How is distortion a sonic fad? Les Paul and Chuck Berry are rolling in their graves. LOL Thanks -L. Hi, I totally agree that every piece of gear has a sweet spot. Some wide, some narrow. And I think it goes without saying that we all have our own unique preferences for sound and what we think is musically engaging. I think the ability of a mic pre to amplify signal without noise is mostly a function of how clean your power supply is and PSRR of the circuit in question. I'm not sure if that's what you were referring to though. I think I understand what you mean. I think using a mic preamp to provide 45 dB of gain on the back end of a summing box does provide what I would consider real color, provided it's not a "wire-with-gain" design. I agree that driving more signal into any device such that you push it into an obvious non-linear zone will produce more distortion. We may have have different tastes as far as appealing levels of distortion go, and perhaps different perceptions of what color is. Sometimes hearing a "major difference" is nice to understand the limits of you gear or to get a feel for a device's flavor, but may not be desirable in the context of balancing subtleties within a mix. I remember the first time I auditioned an Anamod ATS-1. I turned the knobs and thought to myself "is this thing doing anything?" So I cranked the knobs all the way up and heard it audibly distort. My untrained ears/brain thought I was now hearing the "color" of the ATS-1. "Is this what tape sounds like?" I wondered. I then spent the next few years getting acquainted with real tape decks and using them to make recordings in my studio exclusively. The next time I heard the Anamod its color was vividly apparent to me, despite there being no audible distortion. I should have clarified my comment about distortion being a sonic fad, because it's easy to misunderstand what I wrote. I was referring specifically to the trend of purposely using distortion devices in mixing, not because the gear can't do any better spec wise, but because the current trend in a lot of pop/rock genres is to creatively distort stuff....vocals, drums, bass...often in parallel. Distortion will always be cool on guitar amps. A quick search on YouTube to support my claim: www.youtube.com/results?search_query=distortion+on+vocalsLet's revisit this search in 2025 and see if the trend has moved on to something else. By the way...speaking of distortion. I pulled the API 2520 out of the 512 preamp I have here and popped in a Rogue Two prototype. OH. MY. LORD. That preamp came alive! That API 2520 is a bit of a dirt machine especially when the 512 is followed by something with a 600 ohm input impedance. The Rogue Two (extremely low distortion) was a much preferable "color" to these ears. Brad
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 12, 2017 22:12:49 GMT -6
A 57 on snare into a Scully 280 vs a Neve 1073 or a Dukane 2A75 will all have different artifacts that you can highlight as the colors of these pieces of gear. As with all mic preamp there's a limit to how great they are at boosting before you're just amplifying noise. With any color you seek there's a sweet spot to gear, sometimes it doesn't require massive gain and sometimes it does. This is like comparing Kung Fu techniques, Crane vs Tiger. Everybody has differing approaches and opinions. My definition of color will be inadequate or irrelevant to you or somebody else. But in context with controlled parameters? Using a mic preamp to make up 45 db or so of gain with a passive summing mixer is not a way you'd normally incur any real "color." Not the obvious stuff. The sales pitch (part of it) for a passive summing mixer is that your mic preamp(s) is the source of color and you switch to get those colors. The output of a summing mixer isn't what I'd call the most robust level you'd send into a mic preamp if you're seeking some major difference. Color may include saturation or distortion as well. An under driven mic preamp typically won't accomplish that. This is what I was referring to. In general this ain't the way to go. How is distortion a sonic fad? Les Paul and Chuck Berry are rolling in their graves. LOL Thanks -L. Hi, I totally agree that every piece of gear has a sweet spot. ย Some wide, some narrow. ย And I think it goes without saying that we all have our own unique preferences for sound and what we think is musically engaging. ย I think the ability of a mic pre to amplify signal without noise is mostly a function of how clean your power supply is and PSRR of the circuit in question. ย I'm not sure if that's what you were referring to though. I think I understand what you mean. ย I think using a mic preamp to provide 45 dB of gain on the back end of a summing box does provide what I would consider real color, provided it's not a "wire-with-gain" design. ย I agree that driving more signal into any device such that you push it into an obvious non-linear zone will produce more distortion. ย We may have have different tastes as far as appealing levels of distortion go, and perhaps different perceptions of what color is. ย Sometimes hearing a "major difference" is nice to understand the limits of you gear or to get a feel for a device's flavor, but may not be desirable in the context of balancing subtleties within a mix. ย I remember the first time I auditioned an Anamod ATS-1. I turned the knobs and thought to myself "is this thing doing anything?" ย So I cranked the knobs all the way up and heard it audibly distort. ย My untrained ears/brain thought I was now hearing the "color" of the ATS-1. ย "Is this what tape sounds like?" I wondered. ย I then spent the next few years getting acquainted with real tape decks and using them to make recordings in my studio exclusively. ย The next time I heard the Anamod its color was vividly apparent to me, despite there being no audible distortion. I should have clarified my comment about distortion being a sonic fad, because it's easy to misunderstand what I wrote. ย I was referring specifically to the trend of purposely using distortion devices in mixing, not because the gear can't do any better spec wise, but because the current trend in a lot of pop/rock genres is to creatively distort stuff....vocals, drums, bass...often in parallel. ย Distortion will always be cool on guitar amps. ย A quick search on YouTube to support my claim: www.youtube.com/results?search_query=distortion+on+vocalsLet's revisit this search in 2025 and see if the trend has moved on to something else. By the way...speaking of distortion. ย I pulled the API 2520 out of the 512 preamp I have here and popped in a Rogue Two prototype. ย OH. MY. LORD. ย That preamp came alive! ย That API 2520 is a bit of a dirt machine especially when the 512 is followed by something with a 600 ohm input impedance. ย The Rogue Two (extremely low distortion) was a much preferable "color" to these ears. Brad In my experience design trumps intent. If you have a simple 1:2 transformer that's hanging right off the input of a mic preamp that's being exposed to an extremely low amount of voltage, then this is less about color and more about getting that signal to nominal level. Whatever supporting circuitry that could offer significant amount of saturation, envelope shaping under much hotter levels, will simply do it's job instead. By contrast the closer that signal approaches 0 VU (hence my 57 on top snare example) going into that transformer the better the chance you have at incurring potentially desirable sonic anomalies or musical distortion through that device. To be honest it's really a path thing with distortion. We had to live with it at the onset of recorded music in some form or another, yet we continuously worked hard to eliminate it along with other undesirable artifacts as time progressed. We eventually killed tape with digital recording platforms and software based environments and then almost immediately began the path back to distortion, first with the return of old school compressors and eqs, then the digital emulations and early analog attempts followed, then the more sophisticated analog era commenced, along with the increased prowess of digital attempts at modelling analog distortion and here we are in 2017. I seriously doubt there is such a thing as an end to this aesthetic we're in. If anything it will exceed far beyond our wildest imagination. This is not the peak. There is extremely exciting emergent technology coming forth that will impact the way we record music for years to come and as always we should be cognizant of even our recent milestones. Think of how old the Distressor is now and imagine what they said about a compressor that intentionally distorts at it's inception. Yet here it is 20+ years later, people still buy brand new units and Empirical Labs is still kicking out great gear. Now a Distressor is a tool. It's no longer just a distortion compressor. It's an old standby. For some engineers this was their first compressor! I'd say distortion or whatever we want to call it: color, saturation, transient shaping, tube amplification, harmonic enhancement is here to stay. The world survived nearly 100 years of distortion, so why stop now? Remember no matter how brilliant a designer is, they don't have control over how the world uses their technology. Once it's out of their hands and the consumers have it, a guy could have a device you make dimed at 11 and it might sound God awful to you but sound like the shiz to him. That's art. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 13, 2017 8:18:21 GMT -6
You smart people have somewhat made me glaze over a bit...so I've just kinda skimmed here lately...but BradM don't you sell "distortion boxes?" I'm not sure I get why you would say it's a fad. No offense intended, I'm just not sure I get what you're saying.
|
|
|
Post by BradM on May 13, 2017 9:29:24 GMT -6
You smart people have somewhat made me glaze over a bit...so I've just kinda skimmed here lately...but BradM don't you sell "distortion boxes?" I'm not sure I get why you would say it's a fad. No offense intended, I'm just not sure I get what you're saying. Hi John, No offense taken! Let me see if I can clarify my comment, because it was a bit vague. All audio devices produce distortion of some kind. I wasn't referring to subtle musical 0.04% distortion due to 2nd order and 3rd order harmonics. My comment was referring the obvious use of blatant distortion as a creative technique in mixing. Plugins like Decapitator come to mind. Here's a song that has an example of what I'm talking about (on the vocals): And this certainly would not have made its way onto a pop song in the 80's: www.theproducerschoice.com/products/distorted-blends-drum-samplesCompare the production techniques of the 2000's to the 70's, 80's, 90's. Obvious intentional distortion has been in vogue in recent years, but I think tastes will change, as they always do. Some of the the gear (HW and SW) being made today reflects that. I make no product that I would ever call a "distortion box", and especially not the Silver Bullet. I've certainly done an abysmal job describing its purpose or function if I've given that impression to anyone. It's no more a "distortion box" than a CAPI VP28, an API 1608, a Dangerous BAX EQ, or a Neve 1084 is. The Silver Bullet is a high fidelity tone machine that enhances depth, dimension, texture, and gels/finishes a mix with minimal knob tweaking...like people always claim summing boxes do, but with a much more elegant workflow, and more versatile feature set (and better price tag once you include all the cables and converters). I like to think of it as a dual-flavor 2-channel console. It also happens to double as a badass stereo mic preamp, which I have been very lax at promoting. It's definitely not a dirt box. I've never had a customer tell me they purchased any of my products specifically to create distortion. Of course, one can abuse one's gear as they see fit to achieve creative goals. And the things I make will certainly hit a limit where they crap out and distort. But I personally do not use my products at the extremes of their operating limits, nor do I have any reason to believe that my customers primarily are either. I hope that clarifies. Brad
|
|
|
Post by BradM on May 13, 2017 9:50:51 GMT -6
To be honest it's really a path thing with distortion. We had to live with it at the onset of recorded music in some form or another, yet we continuously worked hard to eliminate it along with other undesirable artifacts as time progressed. We eventually killed tape with digital recording platforms and software based environments and then almost immediately began the path back to distortion, first with the return of old school compressors and eqs, then the digital emulations and early analog attempts followed, then the more sophisticated analog era commenced, along with the increased prowess of digital attempts at modelling analog distortion and here we are in 2017. I seriously doubt there is such a thing as an end to this aesthetic we're in. If anything it will exceed far beyond our wildest imagination. This is not the peak. There is extremely exciting emergent technology coming forth that will impact the way we record music for years to come and as always we should be cognizant of even our recent milestones. Think of how old the Distressor is now and imagine what they said about a compressor that intentionally distorts at it's inception. Yet here it is 20+ years later, people still buy brand new units and Empirical Labs is still kicking out great gear. Now a Distressor is a tool. It's no longer just a distortion compressor. It's an old standby. For some engineers this was their first compressor! I'd say distortion or whatever we want to call it: color, saturation, transient shaping, tube amplification, harmonic enhancement is here to stay. The world survived nearly 100 years of distortion, so why stop now? Remember no matter how brilliant a designer is, they don't have control over how the world uses their technology. Once it's out of their hands and the consumers have it, a guy could have a device you make dimed at 11 and it might sound God awful to you but sound like the shiz to him. That's art. Thanks -L. Hi Langston, You make excellent points/observations! I totally concur. That's an especially good point about not having control over how the world uses a piece of gear you create, even if they are using it in a way that sounds like crap to the designer. You're right - that is art. And when a bunch of artists all copy each other and do the same thing for a period of time because it's fashionable...well, I think we all know what that's called. Brad
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 13, 2017 11:06:10 GMT -6
To be honest it's really a path thing with distortion. We had to live with it at the onset of recorded music in some form or another, yet we continuously worked hard to eliminate it along with other undesirable artifacts as time progressed. We eventually killed tape with digital recording platforms and software based environments and then almost immediately began the path back to distortion, first with the return of old school compressors and eqs, then the digital emulations and early analog attempts followed, then the more sophisticated analog era commenced, along with the increased prowess of digital attempts at modelling analog distortion and here we are in 2017. I seriously doubt there is such a thing as an end to this aesthetic we're in. If anything it will exceed far beyond our wildest imagination. This is not the peak. There is extremely exciting emergent technology coming forth that will impact the way we record music for years to come and as always we should be cognizant of even our recent milestones. Think of how old the Distressor is now and imagine what they said about a compressor that intentionally distorts at it's inception. Yet here it is 20+ years later, people still buy brand new units and Empirical Labs is still kicking out great gear. Now a Distressor is a tool. It's no longer just a distortion compressor. It's an old standby. For some engineers this was their first compressor! I'd say distortion or whatever we want to call it: color, saturation, transient shaping, tube amplification, harmonic enhancement is here to stay. The world survived nearly 100 years of distortion, so why stop now? Remember no matter how brilliant a designer is, they don't have control over how the world uses their technology. Once it's out of their hands and the consumers have it, a guy could have a device you make dimed at 11 and it might sound God awful to you but sound like the shiz to him. That's art. Thanks -L. Hi Langston, ย And when a bunch of artists all copy each other and do the same thing for a period of time because it's fashionable...well, I think we all know what that's called. Brad Rock n Roll? Jazz? Hip hop? Just to name a few. They said all 3 of these "fads," would never last. Yet the critics and naysayers are dead and the art form continues. I mean sheesh, the NOLA Jazz fest is legendary and hosts far more than jazz but imagine if there were no such thing as the NOLA or OMG the Montreux Jazz fest? Designs have been called fads too. Bill Putnam's designs went into and out of and back into style in the same century. I remember the stories of LA2As and 1176s on curbs!!! I've seen the same thing happen with consoles and tape machines. Over and over again. A guy gave away a perfect condition Yamaha PM3000 yesterday in my home town. Unicorn tears. Unicorn tears. Fads are a one shot deal and then they are gone for good like Hammer Pants, Furbees and Biker shorts. The rebirth of the cool distortion? That's fashion - of the frequencies. Of course we're not talking goofy ringing distortion, though you will find that from time to time. I'm talking about elegantly implemented facets of it. You mentioned in a previous post about familiarizing yourself with the sound of tape (referencing the Anamod). That's a very valid point. But there are decks that indeed stick out like sore thumbs that producers dig on, engineers too and it's not our jobs or place, to judge them for liking a fuzzbox with reels. LOL If that's what they want then that's what they'll get from us or somebody else. I had a customer who tracked a record to tape and mix it thru Zulu. The differences were obvious, there was more noise than if it was tracked to digital. The audio was very soft, pretty dark and very compressed. Now the decks in use were Teac and Otari machines. I couldn't speak to how well they were calibrated, but the Teac deck they had is just a gloriously funky machine. It is what it is. The Otari was definitely better fidelity but it still has noise if you're not using some kind of NR. Case being, it wasn't more in line with "tape has to be listened for," but rather it was in your face and it sounded cool as shit. That's the bar we have to reach to meet those parameters, intentionally impacted audio. Stuff that's less archival and more arcane. Perhaps it's my personal aesthetic at play but when you see it coming back at you from unprompted empirical data then you have to acknowledge it. By the same contrast there's some really elegant things distortion does to my ears that's very classy. There's tons of room for expansion in that area. Mainly because what we utilize to obtain even the gentle fluffy stuff (like 1073) isn't purpose built with that in mind but rather it's a side effect of using it. If anything this is just the tip of the iceberg with distortion, especially in design. You make some great pieces, I'm definitely digging the Chroma platform. I'm sure that as more people have your tech, your horizons will expand and this may in turn positively impact your approaches to design as working in the music industry did for me. And I'm beyond certain that people will be using your products in many years to come and God willing the same will be true for me. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 13, 2017 11:18:02 GMT -6
I don't necessarily disagree, Brad. I - for one - am not really a fan of intentionally distorted vocals. To me, it's distracting...e.g. the Sturgill Simpson record.
|
|
|
Post by BradM on May 13, 2017 11:36:18 GMT -6
Sorry to get this thread of topic, guys. Okay, back to questioning the audibility of fancy summing setups...
Brad
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 13, 2017 12:06:34 GMT -6
14 channel Active design, clean stages with EQ on every channel. $399 A&H Zed 14.
Chroma and Zulu on every insert, on master buss insert run Silver Bullet with a SSL Compressor and Zulu on the SB insert.
Sick for tracking and mixing.
Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 13, 2017 12:45:50 GMT -6
Or you could just put the hardware on the inserts of your DAW, and go hybrid. You can get virtually the same result if you're hanging that much hardware off of it.
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on May 13, 2017 15:17:59 GMT -6
14 chroma + 15 Zulu + A & H zed14 + motu 16A + SB + SSL Clone $8400 + $6000 + $399 + $1500 + $2500 + 650 = $19449
What console / gear could you really buy with that same money?
^ I don't see this as realistic, and I don't know how quality of a signal path a $399 mixer has with Eq on every channel.. This also assumes you already have monitor controller etc, I just added in conversion plus the other prices of what was listed...
Is there a better converter for $1500 that does 16 analog i and 16 analog out like the motu 16a for summing? Conversion and cabling alone can cost more than the summing box!
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 13, 2017 15:43:55 GMT -6
14 chroma + 15 Zulu + A & H zed14 + motu 16A + SB + SSL Clone $8400 + $6000 + $399 + $1500 + $2500 + 650 = $19449 What console / gear could you really buy with that same money? ^ I don't see this as realistic, and I don't know how quality of a signal path a $399 mixer has with Eq on every channel.. This also assumes you already have monitor controller etc, I just added in conversion plus the other prices of what was listed... Is there a better converter for $1500 that does 16 analog i and 16 analog out like the motu 16a for summing? Conversion and cabling alone can cost more than the summing box! Yup. And that's the whole point. Buy all that stuff and you're in deep. Really deep. And what is it gaining you beyond complexity? There's a way that's virtually as good - maybe slightly different, and maybe better - that costs 1/10th as much. It's why Brad and I designed the SB. There's a great test for those using summing boxes that I've looked for -- but never seem to find. It's a test to determine whether or not "summing" is giving you the magic, or whether hardware not associated with adding the signals back together is giving you the magic. Here's the test....and it's only for the brave. 1. Output your mix (which for most folks is already "summed" 80% ITB) and go into your "summing box" in normal fashion - however many stems wide you like. Your choice. If you want to add hardware that's not post summing box on the 2 buss, put whatever you want on inserts pre summer (for duplication and apples to apples comparison purposes), and then stick whatever you want on your 2 buss. Record Mix back into DAW. 2. Now.....rebuss inside your DAW and collapse the stems so that you're go out of your DAW stereo only into your TWO CHANNELS of your summing box - - then into your stereo buss chain (if any) that you had after the summing box in the previous config. Record Mix Back into DAW. ***Gold stars for those who do this scientifically and run tones to match up levels.*** 3. Now......Compare. ABX. Null. Get anal and test on different monitors in different environments. Report back. Share the files if so led... I've done the tests. I'm pretty confident on what I hear. In simple terms, the magic (in our NSHO) is in the makeup gain (discrete electronics, transformers, tubes, etc..) that surrounds the "summing", not in the summing itself. And if that is in fact the case, you can get the same result by going OTB with 2 channels as you can with 48+. Same thing can apply WITH summing if that's your preferred work flow, but it's not a necessity. As always YMMV as they say.....
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 13, 2017 16:17:09 GMT -6
14 chroma + 15 Zulu + A & H zed14 + motu 16A + SB + SSL Clone $8400 + $6000 + $399 + $1500 + $2500 + 650 = $19449 What console / gear could you really buy with that same money? ^ I don't see this as realistic, and I don't know how quality of a signal path a $399 mixer has with Eq on every channel.. This also assumes you already have monitor controller etc, I just added in conversion plus the other prices of what was listed... Is there a better converter for $1500 that does 16 analog i and 16 analog out like the motu 16a for summing? Conversion and cabling alone can cost more than the summing box! Don't you need converters regardless? I mean that's more of a build my studio from scratch budget more than a guy who is auditioning summing or mixing on a console budget. Converters were a given in my suggestion. Your numbers are correct it is an "investment." This was for tracking and mixing. I have customers who own a single chain that costs more than 50% of that $20,000 figure. Far more than I anticipated. So to have an entire system that covers your tracking and mixing needs plus offers extreme flexibility is actually pretty cheap in the grand scheme. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on May 13, 2017 20:52:04 GMT -6
illacovMost people need to add conversion when considering summing especially for 16-32 input summing boxes...Standard configuration for most interfaces/ converters are in lumps of 8 I/O whether ADC or DAC. Many I know have 16 Ins and 16 outs and work with HW inserts in PT and are used to working that way. They can chain up to 10 HW inserts in a row per audio/ aux/ master fader track.. The outputs and inputs have to correspond for this to work. Incorporating a summing mixer would cost $ but also require a change in workflow. Most summing mixers don't have mulitple inserts per channel, ( not sure why ) so if I want to saturate one stem with outboard after compressing and summing it would take complex patching/ re routing and be a total pain, that is unless your summing mixer has a routing matrix but now we are talking consoles pretty much..In the hybrid workflow I could insert my saturation device after I printed or summed to a subgroup if need be instead of having to output to a summing mixer I also realize most summing mixers are 32 channels so that's even more outputs needed available just to dedicate to summing if working how I do with Pro Tools and HW inserts. Incorporating summing is a big expense for 8/10 members here.. Yes a patch bay can facilitate the use of the same I/O for tracking and mixing however my Apollo only has 8 analog I/O, so I put the motu figure up there as a wonderful converter people highly recommend and it's a great price IMO.. What if you prefer Apollo or Lynx or Prism conversion so you go with any of those 16 I/O converters instead of the motu... Now we are talking $3k-10k added to the above equation That's why drbill keeps racking up on his I/O so he can seemlessly print his beloved HW right back into the same audio track with a new labeled playlist. I love HW inserts and think they are amazing and for most who work like that the gear is hard patched or patchable... Take Care ๐
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,937
|
Post by ericn on May 13, 2017 21:30:16 GMT -6
illacovMost people need to add conversion when considering summing especially for 16-32 input summing boxes...Standard configuration for most interfaces/ converters are in lumps of 8 I/O whether ADC or DAC. Many I know have 16 Ins and 16 outs and work with HW inserts in PT and are used to working that way. They can chain up to 10 HW inserts in a row per audio/ aux/ master fader track.. The outputs and inputs have to correspond for this to work. Incorporating a summing mixer would cost $ but also require a change in workflow. Most summing mixers don't have mulitple inserts per channel, ( not sure why ) so if I want to saturate one stem with outboard after compressing and summing it would take complex patching/ re routing and be a total pain, that is unless your summing mixer has a routing matrix but now we are talking consoles pretty much..In the hybrid workflow I could insert my saturation device after I printed or summed to a subgroup if need be instead of having to output to a summing mixer I also realize most summing mixers are 32 channels so that's even more outputs needed available just to dedicate to summing if working how I do with Pro Tools and HW inserts. Incorporating summing is a big expense for 8/10 members here.. Yes a patch bay can facilitate the use of the same I/O for tracking and mixing however my Apollo only has 8 analog I/O, so I put the motu figure up there as a wonderful converter people highly recommend and it's a great price IMO.. What if you prefer Apollo or Lynx or Prism conversion so you go with any of those 16 I/O converters instead of the motu... Now we are talking $3k-10k added to the above equation That's why drbill keeps racking up on his I/O so he can seemlessly print his beloved HW right back into the same audio track with a new labeled playlist. I love HW inserts and think they are amazing and for most who work like that the gear is hard patched or patchable... Take Care ๐ [ I think Conversion is a big expense for any of us!
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 13, 2017 21:31:48 GMT -6
illacovMost people need to add conversion when considering summing especially for 16-32 input summing boxes...Standard configuration for most interfaces/ converters are in lumps of 8 I/O whether ADC or DAC. Many I know have 16 Ins and 16 outs and work with HW inserts in PT and are used to working that way. They can chain up to 10 HW inserts in a row per audio/ aux/ master fader track.. The outputs and inputs have to correspond for this to work. Incorporating a summing mixer would cost $ but also require a change in workflow. Most summing mixers don't have mulitple inserts per channel, ( not sure why ) so if I want to saturate one stem with outboard after compressing and summing it would take complex patching/ re routing and be a total pain, that is unless your summing mixer has a routing matrix but now we are talking consoles pretty much..In the hybrid workflow I could insert my saturation device after I printed or summed to a subgroup if need be instead of having to output to a summing mixer I also realize most summing mixers are 32 channels so that's even more outputs needed available just to dedicate to summing if working how I do with Pro Tools and HW inserts. Incorporating summing is a big expense for 8/10 members here.. Yes a patch bay can facilitate the use of the same I/O for tracking and mixing however my Apollo only has 8 analog I/O, so I put the motu figure up there as a wonderful converter people highly recommend and it's a great price IMO.. What if you prefer Apollo or Lynx or Prism conversion so you go with any of those 16 I/O converters instead of the motu... Now we are talking $3k-10k added to the above equation That's why drbill keeps racking up on his I/O so he can seemlessly print his beloved HW right back into the same audio track with a new labeled playlist. I love HW inserts and think they are amazing and for most who work like that the gear is hard patched or patchable... Take Care ๐ I concur that one is "convenient." However I would like to point out that the Allen and Heath 14 channel was the LEAST expensive component of the summing scenario I posted and it had inserts on every channel plus panning, EQ, aux sends and an insert on the master buss. Features wise alone that's beating lots of summing mixers, this is before you look at the cost. Whether or not it's your optimum choice is just as unknown as if a summing mixer without those features would be. I have racked up on tons of analog but your not gaining much in time saved if you're printing stems on multiple HW inserts versus printing a mix with live inserts running. 4 minutes mixdown is the same for both scenarios. Or direct outs to a board with that same hardware inserted. Same amount of time. Patchbays are massive time savers in my world. The b**ch is recall. But that's true regardless of how you proceed. As well, don't forget if you ditch the board you sacrifice the analog trims, mic preamps, analog eq and the added degree of playing with levels (like attenuating via the fader) before worrying about clipping your return inputs on digital returns. This is also invaluable during prints since you have added gain staging and tone shaping available. There's plenty of compressors that don't have input controls, especially those with fixed thresholds. It's always an added convenience to have some extra analog gain available to hit the 1176 or LA2A hotter as a hardware insert. I've purchased an analog board (a Mackie Mix8 board from GC) to experiment with and do some demos for analog gain staging regarding this very subject. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 13, 2017 22:04:18 GMT -6
FYI - I'm not printing my tracks with hardware back into PT. That's a groove buster. If I was doing that, I could get away with 16 i/o and 1/4 the hardware I have. I'm using all my hardware on inserts "live" during a mix where I can grab knobs, turn pots, you know, MIX. That said, I turn out a lot of music every year for TV and the like, so I NEED to work fast. I'm not making an album for myself. So I'm OK with having to do a "recall" if I screw up a mix and have to do it over. I can compromise on that because it's rare I have to do a remix. But I won't compromise by mixing on a mixer or plugins. Not at my current situation. Maybe someday though. But probably not. I don't get all the gaga over a little A&H or Mackie mixer. That would be an incredible downgrade - sonically, workflow, and every other way. I have 10 inserts on every PT channel. I don't know any mixer that has more than 2. And that's a stretch. I have panning on every channel. AND I can automate it. I have UNLIMITED Aux sends. Well, at least 256 - might as well be unlimited. I've never tried to go more. Pretty sure you can do at least 512 though. I have trims that are automatabIe, so I can hit any piece of gear as hard - or not - as I want. Automatable. I can create virtually unlimited complex bussing and stems setups internally. And recall or load them into different sessions in a blink. AND, I have 10 inserts on the master buss as well. I can print alternate mixes simultaneously. One pass. SO, with 10 inserts on each channel where I can patch in killer outboard gear along with all the functionality that mixers would have give their Left nut for - for decades, why would I want a little 14 channel mixer? I've got a 120 input OrionX console in storage that should be up FS. I just somehow can't emotionally part with it yet. Hardware inserts / Hybrid / HDX Delay Compensation. Bringing the dream.....
|
|
|
Post by illacov on May 13, 2017 22:46:49 GMT -6
FYI - I'm not printing my tracks with hardware back into PT. That's a groove buster. If I was doing that, I could get away with 16 i/o and 1/4 the hardware I have. I'm using all my hardware on inserts "live" during a mix where I can grab knobs, turn pots, you know, MIX. That said, I turn out a lot of music every year for TV and the like, so I NEED to work fast. I'm not making an album for myself. So I'm OK with having to do a "recall" if I screw up a mix and have to do it over. I can compromise on that because it's rare I have to do a remix. But I won't compromise by mixing on a mixer or plugins. Not at my current situation. Maybe someday though. But probably not. I don't get all the gaga over a little A&H or Mackie mixer. That would be an incredible downgrade - sonically, workflow, and every other way. I have 10 inserts on every PT channel. I don't know any mixer that has more than 2. And that's a stretch. I have panning on every channel. AND I can automate it. I have UNLIMITED Aux sends. Well, at least 256 - might as well be unlimited. I've never tried to go more. Pretty sure you can do at least 512 though. I have trims that are automatabIe, so I can hit any piece of gear as hard - or not - as I want. Automatable. I can create virtually unlimited complex bussing and stems setups internally. And recall or load them into different sessions in a blink. AND, I have 10 inserts on the master buss as well. I can print alternate mixes simultaneously. One pass. SO, with 10 inserts on each channel where I can patch in killer outboard gear along with all the functionality that mixers would have give their Left nut for - for decades, why would I want a little 14 channel mixer? I've got a 120 input OrionX console in storage that should be up FS. I just somehow can't emotionally part with it yet. Hardware inserts / Hybrid / HDX Delay Compensation. ย Bringing the dream..... How hot can you come out of your DAC before you hit audible distortion? Have you compared equivalent gain with your D&R off your DAC into a chosen piece vs digital gain via your trim plugin? I've done tests like this and heard audible differences between hitting the DAC hotter to get gain vs using a clean analog stage to get the same or hotter gain. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on May 13, 2017 22:48:45 GMT -6
illacovYes I was referring to how I work with my 3 pieces of HW, probably wasn't clear in how I said so ๐ If I want to use my HW on more than one source, then I have to print the return/ HW insert is a must. I can pan in the daw, clip gain in the daw before and after. Is there any advantage to panning or trimming in the analog domain? ( trimming not adding gain ) From Sound On Sound : " Harminic distortion on the outputs is very low indeed (below 110dB), with evenly distributed even and odd components. The inputs have a slight tendency towards odd-harmonic distortion when the levels are pushed towards 0dBFS, but at around -20dBFS the balance is very even and all distortion components are below 110dB." I know Dr Bill would do a mix live with HW inserts, I was speaking of the step after all of that when the mix is printed! However he clarified ๐ In PT you can mult your outputs so this makes it easy to print stems with compression. ( this is when I print all stems for recall )
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 13, 2017 22:50:29 GMT -6
FYI - I'm not printing my tracks with hardware back into PT. That's a groove buster. If I was doing that, I could get away with 16 i/o and 1/4 the hardware I have. I'm using all my hardware on inserts "live" during a mix where I can grab knobs, turn pots, you know, MIX. That said, I turn out a lot of music every year for TV and the like, so I NEED to work fast. I'm not making an album for myself. So I'm OK with having to do a "recall" if I screw up a mix and have to do it over. I can compromise on that because it's rare I have to do a remix. But I won't compromise by mixing on a mixer or plugins. Not at my current situation. Maybe someday though. But probably not. I don't get all the gaga over a little A&H or Mackie mixer. That would be an incredible downgrade - sonically, workflow, and every other way. I have 10 inserts on every PT channel. I don't know any mixer that has more than 2. And that's a stretch. I have panning on every channel. AND I can automate it. I have UNLIMITED Aux sends. Well, at least 256 - might as well be unlimited. I've never tried to go more. Pretty sure you can do at least 512 though. I have trims that are automatabIe, so I can hit any piece of gear as hard - or not - as I want. Automatable. I can create virtually unlimited complex bussing and stems setups internally. And recall or load them into different sessions in a blink. AND, I have 10 inserts on the master buss as well. I can print alternate mixes simultaneously. One pass. SO, with 10 inserts on each channel where I can patch in killer outboard gear along with all the functionality that mixers would have give their Left nut for - for decades, why would I want a little 14 channel mixer? I've got a 120 input OrionX console in storage that should be up FS. I just somehow can't emotionally part with it yet. Hardware inserts / Hybrid / HDX Delay Compensation. Bringing the dream..... How hot can you come out of your DAC before you hit audible distortion? Have you compared equivalent gain with your D&R off your DAC into a chosen piece vs digital gain via your trim plugin? I've done tests like this and heard audible differences between hitting the DAC hotter to get gain vs using a clean analog stage to get the same or hotter gain. Thanks -L. Hot enough to drive anything I want into crazy distortion. That's enough for me. It's all in the gain staging. I must admit to occasionally seeing blinking red lights on my AD/DA though. But not often. If I WANTED to I could come out my D/A into my console and allow the console to drive my outboard. It's got crazy good headroom that's clean as a whistle - right up until it folds. But there's no point in it unless I want to push faders or use the EQ. And the compromises (recall and patching) outweigh the benefits for me.
|
|