|
Post by illacov on Dec 16, 2016 7:06:28 GMT -6
They did add MCU extender support. In time for mine to be on the fritz!! Don't get me wrong...I just downloaded the latest because I haven't seen it since 4, and I'm staring down the barrel of a $300 upgrade from Steinberg if I want to keep running it on OSX. ....but, so far I've literally had to set a 10 preferences that simply are weird defaults. Asking me if I want to save a file every time I hit stop is weird. for whom is that logical? Midi CCs not set to reset on stop means anything using a sustain pedal will just keep going-where is that a good idea, I hope it chases properly. Every time I open a plug in, it throws me back to the other desktop....that's an Apple thing, but still...that means that they don't want you to use full screen? Not something they test on OSX? Can't figure out how to disable software monitoring. I had to just stop the software feed and open the hardware control panel mixer. End results being similar isn't really what one app or another is about, is it? I record fairly linearly and do very little editing at all. I'm quite sure I could achieve similar results in Reaper....or probably a $5 Garageband....now that the racks of hardware inserts and auxes are sold off...it's all about speed and intuitiveness. And for me, yes-it's also going to be composition tools now. For 20 years I ran an audio recording system....and a MIDI/sampling/sequencing system....the desicion to merge then waslargely based on it turning out that the best native audio engine when I tested a few years ago WAS in fact also the best compositional environment. Bro you need a Reaper buddy. I have no idea how your initial experiences are so shitty but one thing to note is that Reaper users can share preferences and profiles. I may not have the same hardware as you but its easy enough to switch that in the prefs window. The ReaInsert thing just sounds totally bizarre. Its outputs, inputs, PDC and volume. You can even save an instance of ReaInsert for each physical i/o patch and rename it as your patch. It sounds like you have a weird thing going on with your profile. I have Reaper on my pc and on the mac at church. We record sermons with the mac and the record monitoring is always something I have to turn ON not off when I hit record. If you have a digital dsp monitoring system then I understand your angst. I have an RME system with Total Mix. Does anybody here have some solid prefs or profiles they want to share? Mac users? Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 13, 2016 20:18:04 GMT -6
Arrangement will make a bigger difference and then some if you address it at the onset.
Making a piano cut where theres 4 coinciding tuned sources is a whole lot more of a challenge than making it cut where nothing is happening.
I find way too much right hand and left hand action (playing the parts a guitar and other instruments should be playing) creates havoc later on if your goal is to experience a big cutting piano sound.
Leave some room for the rest of us in the damn band LOL.
A perfect example is Let It Be or The Long and Winding Road.
Naked they are pretty much flawless and intimate.
Add in all that extra ornamentation and it just sullies the impact of those records. Even with tasteful arranging around Macas parts it still just hurts the impact. Gotta know when to leave things be.
Thanks. -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 12, 2016 12:39:28 GMT -6
Langston - the problem of course is recall. Or I should say "instant" recall. But if I suspect I may have to revisit a track, I either take quick notes, or just print the tracks back into the DAW with the aforementioned hardware on it to free up the gear, make recall easier, or make sure nothing changes. Also (and I'd guess you and many guys doing this also do), I have my gear set to my preferred sweet spot, and then trim into and out of it to drive it as I want. If it doesn't work or "sound right", I just move on to a different piece instead of tweaking on it. Obviously, you need a fairly large amount of hardware to do this, but if you'll note, this is how the big boy mixers use a large percentage of their walls of gear. They just leave it set and use something else if one particular piece doesn't work. The way I have my bays and gear wired up, putting a piece of hardware on any DAW insert is actually faster and easier than using a plugin. Not to mention (as you know) that getting the SOUND you're after is significantly faster with the hardware. If I'm forced to use only plugins, I'm constantly futzing with stuff. If I correctly choose the right piece of hardware, I'm generally dialed in and moving on in a few seconds vs. a few minutes with a plug -- AND it sounds nicer. <thumbsup> Bingo. Gear so sweet you don't have to look at it. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 12, 2016 10:12:12 GMT -6
I find the biggest relief for headache is results.
The analog I have at my fingertips is never to impress the next man. Its not always going to come with a hefty pricetag or curb appeal. Its simply to serve a purpose. I have loads of garage sale gear, mixers and other items that are repurposed as multiple channel mic pres etc...They habe fantastic color. Superb analog tonality. And they offer results the minute you patch them. Half the time, theres no knob to turn to get your sound.
I really dig gear thats got a vibe of its own, especially if its super accessible.
Its just faster for my workflow and easier to get results. You're talking two patch cables and one plugin. 90 seconds tops to get it rockin.
Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 11, 2016 19:20:25 GMT -6
The more I get into elaborate gain staging episodes, and analog summing, etc, the more I feel like it's just a huge headache that I really hate to deal with. I am really interested in simple solutions, most of which are standard procedures at this point. To quote Jerry Seinfield, "The Joy is in the work." Count it all joy! Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 11, 2016 13:15:33 GMT -6
What treatment do you guys often give to piano tracks in a busy mix? Specifically VI piano, if that matters. I struggle with piano tracks getting buried. I think about mixing like an arranger first. If piano is fighting to live in a mix, before you start trying a ton of tricks to make it pop, examine which elements conflict with the piano. If they can be removed or examined for importance, I'd definitely point out what and where the piano struggles the most. Sometimes theres stuff that plain doesnt belong on a record. Sometimes its actually the piano! Where an upright or a grand would add too much space, a stage piano might not or switching to Rhodes. But in some cases things gotta go to make the record hit right. I'm you'll get a ton of suggestions to saturate it, parallel compress it, eq it, or automate it. All good starting points, but really evaluate the arrangment. Theres some pretty interesting stories about A listers removing elements from records without consulting with the client, but the end result was a huge sounding record. Are there any coincedent sources? Overlapping timbres? How many stereo sources? Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 10, 2016 19:41:59 GMT -6
My hero! Watch the Lost and Found clip. Almost a completely passive channel strip. Nothing more badass than that! I've heard of these boards before and they reshaped the equipment world forever. I'd love to know more about the new products they are releasing, especially the 500 series pre with EQ. I wonder if they will recreate those custom transformers? Dear God in Heaven those are some mean pieces of iron. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 10, 2016 19:25:37 GMT -6
ragan typical pad reduce 20-30 db, you could use clip gain in Pro Tools, or another type of gain/ trim plugin to digitally "pad" the signal. Wa76: I like to drive the input by cranking the input dial, also sending a nice healthy -6 to -12 dbfs peak signal into the wa76, which also produces cool tones that differ from the previous workflow. 30 on the input dial and 30 on the output dial is unity gain on the wa76. Also when sending a lower level from PT, I also get to make use of the sweet output transformer as well. I've always enjoyed the way a 76 breaks up when fed healthy signal levels at the inputs. Typically when I come off the DAC, my REV Fs sound pretty good, but its never the same as if the signal was coming off either my Scully 280/B or if the 1073 clone I have was hitting it with some juice. Once you sort out those particular tweaks for each piece of gear, its always complete fun to sort of cook up your own special pre and compressor combo for a particular source during mixing. Of course noise is a factor, something like the Silver Bullet is definitely far superior to a monolithic device like a mic preamp. BUT, listen in context! If you are only going to have said hybrid chain on a source that's tucked in the mix (you just want the distortion to add definition) then listening to the thing peaking at 0db and saying "Oh that's noisey," is counterproductive. Park it where it's supposed to live in the record before you evaluate the noise imprint. If it's still too noisy then re-evaluate or use a gate LOL On the clip I posted that was my dbx doing somewhere's in the vicinity of 6-9db (same for each clip depending on the hit), but in context I wouldn't have it as the main drum sound, rather as a parallel buss to thicken the impact of the drums overall. So they wouldn't necessarily be that loud in the record, just enough to make you miss it if it was gone. As far as FET compression goes, I still truly adore my Altec 1612B. What a beast of a compressor that thing is. Just amazing on DI guitar and when you crank the input its got this truly delicious juice to it that is perfect for leads that need clean but dirty attitude. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 9, 2016 18:12:59 GMT -6
This is primarily an idea where your mic preamp has the trafo first. So basically you can zap the input with line level juice and gain some cool results. Its all about the trafo.
Easy way to hear whats happening is to turn down the preamp output and listen to how your line level signal level impacts the input section of the preamp.
Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 9, 2016 17:54:11 GMT -6
What I'm chatting about is turning your pres that you already own into parts of your mixing process. Mainly because, thats how old gear was fed signal, but also because it sounds a ton better to my ears, probably moreso due to the robust amp stage in your preamp (than your DAC) and the possible transformer in its output section. Either way the HW comps sound a touch anemic off the DAC outputs, versus that same signal fed into mic pres and then into the compressor. Just to clarify: Are you suggesting going DA into the microphone inputs of our preamps instead of the line inputs? I thought the entire purpose of having line inputs in preamps was to match line outputs with line inputs. This is correct. But line level signal into a mic preamp transformer is fun to behold and offers loads of opportunity for tone shaping and character. Try it, be mindful of your gain staging, be sure to use the output volume on your preamp and let your ears guide you. Transformerless stuff can offer some interesting results as well. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 8, 2016 13:26:41 GMT -6
Greetings Brad, I was moreso making reference to the implicit difference between how limited a standard mic preamp (input gain, possible a pad and an output gain - sometimes not) can be compared to your awesome device. Mic preamps offer very basic feature sets and the SB offers far more dexterity to shape tone and character. In terms of what I'm sharing, mainly a conceptual "heads up," about other applications of gear people already own. Plus some proof of concept for public consumption. BTW, I'm sure 4 SBs and an 8 channel Zulu would offer some serious analog mojo during tracking and mixing. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 8, 2016 10:34:36 GMT -6
No offense I think you are missing my point, passing your signal through a silver bullet, essentially does what you are describing, so it seems to me it is just another means to the end that you are describing. I'm not offended, just clarifying. I think to compare the technique I'm sharing to what the SB does is an oversimplification of Brad's devices. A SB is more than a mic preamp. Its actually far more complex than that. My suggestion is more so about looking at the gear you already have in a different light. The sound of a mic preamp is going to be very unique compared to anything else because you're using it in a non-standard applications. A mic preamp input is typically expecting a different level of signal and sending line level signal with the intention of gaining some possible color and definitely the gain staging/coupling to make your compressors/eqs happy is worth the experimentation but also its completely incorrect, which is what makes getting good sounding results from it so rewarding If anything its going to add some unusual flavors to your rig that nothing else will. Its totally a sound and technique you should be using right alongside your Silver Bullet and your Zulu. Or all 3 at once Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 8, 2016 7:28:26 GMT -6
I just tried this. I've done it before but rarely and not as a matter of course. Was printing some electric guitars through the Harrison EQs and the WA76s, standard for me, and I did two versions, one of which hit the Great River MP-2NV before the Harrison and Warms. Level matched. Blind tested. I definitely preferred the print that hit the Great River. Sounds fuller, more apparent volume (RMS matched). I'll definitely be doing this more. Thanks Langston. Ragan have you played with the WA76 in all buttons out mode? Not in, OUT. The front end of my 1176 REV F turn into a simpler Urei 1108 mic preamp when you do this. No 48v but on a dynamic or a tube mic or use a phantom power supply, its pretty sweet. You should try that with the WA76, its a free 30-40db of gain and it WORKS. I've cut vocals with my 1176 before lol. I mean JUST the 1176, in all buttons out mode. Btw this also works with LA2As. If you turn the peak reduction all the way down, its now a sick tube preamp This is also a great opportunity to use them as transformer coupled line drivers for your other HW during mixing. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 8, 2016 7:21:09 GMT -6
Isn't this topic everything the silver bullet is about ? Sort of. The SB is something you strap on the 2 bus. Langston is talking about using HW inserts but going from your DA to preamps/transformers before you hit your HW when using inserts/printing. The transformers part a la carte, I haven't truly found much joy with. See it's tricky. Depending on the transformer, you might need to send some serious voltage through it, to get any real degree of character out of it. If you're using it just for the loading properties say to see if it makes your 1176 act differently, then go for it. But you have to pick a transformer and put it in the right scenario if you want some mojo. Most times, the baby peanuts are where the money is at. Something tiny that was designed for low level applications offers loads of character if you can punish it with gain. Here's an idea, but one I can't try til later this week. If you have some transformer spares laying around, patch them on the insert of your mic preamp. So not on the ouput of a preamp but literally on a preamp that has an insert. See how hot you need to get the input section to get that puppy to dance for you. You might need to attenuate the output section but it should prove interesting for most folks. One could in theory try something like this with a mic preamp too but you might be better off using a DI first. So it would be signal from DAC to mic pre #1 then add the DI off the insert into mic preamp #2 (set to whatever crazy setting for saturation) and back into the preamp insert loop of mic pre #1. Sounds like pure fun if you think about it Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 8, 2016 7:06:06 GMT -6
Isn't this topic everything the silver bullet is about ? No, this isn't about a product. Its about your studio. Yes to all reading, please go and support LTL, buy their Silver Bullet Tone Amp. Please support me and try Zulu. What I'm chatting about is turning your pres that you already own into parts of your mixing process. Mainly because, thats how old gear was fed signal, but also because it sounds a ton better to my ears, probably moreso due to the robust amp stage in your preamp (than your DAC) and the possible transformer in its output section. Either way the HW comps sound a touch anemic off the DAC outputs, versus that same signal fed into mic pres and then into the compressor. It totally requires some ITB and OTB gain staging from you to pull it off or the use of a pad or DI to make your mic pre work well with this process. But once you get it down, its incredibly addictive. Its something I've been doing for about a decade and change, but on the down low. Mainly because I love the way it sounds. When I was dumping multitrack sessions to my Tascam 38 or any other deck, it was always signal from the DAC to a mic preamp to the deck. It just made more sense to do that than to over drive my DAC. My thinking is to use every ounce of gear you own as much as you can in the most efficient and effective way. Short of buying other pieces of gear, what else could you do to get your compressor to act and sound like another piece? The advantage of doing it during mixing is context. You can really hear how the saturation or simple gain staging works with the compressor in the context of the mix and if it doesn't work out for you, then you still have your source. I've chatted with some pretty gifted cats in my travels and alot of them do this, but it never makes it into articles online so consider this a cool tip from your bro Langston. Try this out with all your gear. Once tracking is over, pres become texture boxes that help to interface with your outboard gear. I'd be glad to do the same test with my Altec or my Gates. Same preamp. I know for the drums I posted, that this same technique took what I thought was a good starting point for a drum sound (not the take though) and gave it a big shot of testosterone. Perhaps its a bit much for most people, but I got nothing inside my computer that would do that. Nada. I've tried most anything you can imagine plugin wise and they won't go into that realm of saturated beef. That's a really analog sound. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 7, 2016 15:19:39 GMT -6
If you already have a mic pre or pres available that have some "flavor," then I would recommend those first. If not then still try your outboard preamps if simply for the loading and interaction, plus the gain staging. Whats audio bacon? Thanks -L. Sorry, CAPI missing link. I have used the mic pre trick a good bit, but I feel like you don't get the texture of the output stage. Good for input transformer distortion. Texture of the output stage? Of?? If you mean inserting the compressor between the input and output stage of a mic preamp then by all means God yes. You can use the compressor to overdrive the output stage without distorting the input stage. Good call Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 6, 2016 23:21:58 GMT -6
Would using a bank of just transformers hanging on your dac outputs provide the same loading? I have been wanting to pickup a pair of "audio bacon" to use before my comps.I noticed the change in character of my comps from tracking to mix down. Maybe I should just try a line transformer first. If you already have a mic pre or pres available that have some "flavor," then I would recommend those first. If not then still try your outboard preamps if simply for the loading and interaction, plus the gain staging. Whats audio bacon? Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 6, 2016 23:00:19 GMT -6
I think the role line stages play is huge. Based on using Fairchild 660s and 670s with Pultecs, I believed it was better to eq after the compression. When we started using plug-ins, I found this no longer made anything resembling the difference I'd heard with the hardware. My conclusion is that the Pultec just made a better sounding load for the Fairchildren than our consoles. <br> Bingo. <br> <br> Its why I think hardware vs plugin shootouts are hogwash. Old school hw had sensitivity to loading, plugins do not. Hw did not exist in a vacuum, they relied heavily on the supporting equipment to be "right," for them. Plugins exist in a vacuum and dont interact upon each other despite being chained. In plugins there is no context of that. A transformerless opamp coupled DAC will load an 1176 differently than the output of a transformer coupled discrete mic preamp. So this test is meant to offer up the opportunity to gain stage and color audio but as well to showcase how the way we connect to our outboard in a digital setup may indeed be non-standard to how it was originally designed. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 6, 2016 20:18:19 GMT -6
And what I'm trying to do is point out how those differences can translate into things that offer positive applications for us as recording engineers, record producers and musicians. For instance, many people look at their 160A/166/266 or whatever may have you generic compressor and look at it as only being capable of 1 type of sound with X type of compression. Now in reality this is pretty true, the VCA chip based compression, along with the input and output stages plus whatever buffering stages may be there were designed for that type of compressor and nothing more. But if you compare the technology in that dbx to say another dbx vca based compressor but the second device has fancy transformer based line stages or some discrete sort of coolness to it, then aside from possible slight changes to said circuit the only differences are the stages. What if the majority of what you are hearing is how the transformer coupled line stages are reacting to signal rather than just the compression circuit? Plenty of studios have pres in their racks or in their boards that may offer some tone. Additionally the compressor has a front end that will react to audio along with an output stage that normally isn't used for any type of coloring or character building unless it's spec'd for that. So what we are trying to do in this situation is intentionally make the mic preamp and the compressor enter some THD that we can find manageable for all sorts of purposes: Drum smash buss Vocal Effecty Buss Girth to Guitars Insane girth to Bass Beefing Up synths Most of this can be added in via parallel buss or if you dig stuff like this, you kind of build a custom buss to get smashed or leave other elements out. So maybe your kick and snare go to this but your bottom snare doesn't and your overheads don't. All of these colors are at your disposal and its purely analog in nature. You have way more room to push and manipulate your signal within your gear since you can attenuate the output of your compressor (hopefullly, otherwise it's inline pad time but use a compressor with an output control). Here's 2 clips to check out on Soundcloud and I'll post links. https%3A//soundcloud.com/tod-levine_handsome-audio/sets/to-pre-or-not-to-pre-hardware-comp-test-with-mic-pre-during-mixingThanks -L. Thanks for doing this.. and I admire your spirit in trying to get actual audio on the group and into the discussion with actual things to listen to and discuss.. rather than just opinion. Kudos. Interesting.. the saturation... and whilst Its not my cup of tea, its a valid tool and thanks again for posting. cheers Wiz Wiz imagine this version for a parallel kick or bassline. The demo was just to show that it definitely transforms how the dbx interacts with the audio versus the no preamp version. I can totally do a "cleaner," pass with the channel strips to illustrate, but you definitely gain something by using the mic preamp. This definitely will be different from preamp to preamp as well. As a featured sound? Maybe, maybe not, it has to fit the production values. But the simple fact that this is possible and way more should offer anybody looking for more depth a bunch of promise. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 6, 2016 18:03:15 GMT -6
With this technique are you referring to audio that's already passed through pre's and comps on the way in to the DAW,(sort of second pass)? If so would that be different to hooking up extra hardware on the way in? In a way yes. If you only have so many mic preamps during tracking then they wouldn't necessarily be freed up for this sort of application, the same is true for your compressors. This is more so to provide some insight into using your gear that sits at idle during post production and mixdown time in a digital world. During tracking, you might not be thinking parallel mixbuss or even about the mix. Definitely worth a crank. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 6, 2016 17:46:09 GMT -6
You are probably hearing differences in line stage and transformer loading. And what I'm trying to do is point out how those differences can translate into things that offer positive applications for us as recording engineers, record producers and musicians. For instance, many people look at their 160A/166/266 or whatever may have you generic compressor and look at it as only being capable of 1 type of sound with X type of compression. Now in reality this is pretty true, the VCA chip based compression, along with the input and output stages plus whatever buffering stages may be there were designed for that type of compressor and nothing more. But if you compare the technology in that dbx to say another dbx vca based compressor but the second device has fancy transformer based line stages or some discrete sort of coolness to it, then aside from possible slight changes to said circuit the only differences are the stages. What if the majority of what you are hearing is how the transformer coupled line stages are reacting to signal rather than just the compression circuit? Plenty of studios have pres in their racks or in their boards that may offer some tone. Additionally the compressor has a front end that will react to audio along with an output stage that normally isn't used for any type of coloring or character building unless it's spec'd for that. So what we are trying to do in this situation is intentionally make the mic preamp and the compressor enter some THD that we can find manageable for all sorts of purposes: Drum smash buss Vocal Effecty Buss Girth to Guitars Insane girth to Bass Beefing Up synths Most of this can be added in via parallel buss or if you dig stuff like this, you kind of build a custom buss to get smashed or leave other elements out. So maybe your kick and snare go to this but your bottom snare doesn't and your overheads don't. All of these colors are at your disposal and its purely analog in nature. You have way more room to push and manipulate your signal within your gear since you can attenuate the output of your compressor (hopefullly, otherwise it's inline pad time but use a compressor with an output control). Here's 2 clips to check out on Soundcloud and I'll post links. https%3A//soundcloud.com/tod-levine_handsome-audio/sets/to-pre-or-not-to-pre-hardware-comp-test-with-mic-pre-during-mixingThanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 6, 2016 16:08:56 GMT -6
An earlier part of the discussion was getting into what exiting new hardware might be created to do such things. The other bits discussed are vital aspects of the best ways to do what you want, and relate. They do not detract from your experiment. But they seem to distract you, so I'm out I guess. I have read your posts for years on many websites and always admired the depth of knowledge you possess. This is why I'm truly surprised by your reaction. Is the topic of this thread of little value to you? I honestly wanted people to try something different for once rather than the status quo and while I can see how dithering your hardware output may be indeed "something different," or best, I started this thread with the intention of posting some proof of concept. If we (meaning us all) are going to discuss an audible phenomenon, why not post some clips of with and without, provide some context. No need for silly blind tests just point out whats happening so we can all benefit. Let's all collectively have that "aha," moment. The previous posts have been us all talking around each other and not truly talking with each other. The more vague it gets the less I feel it promotes community. I'm uploading the comparison clips. Please stay in the conversation, please contribute but let's try to keep it organized if we can. That's my only request. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 6, 2016 15:14:23 GMT -6
It all relates to the original premise. If you want to run line level DAC output into a preamp, the simplest approach that doesn't reinvent the wheel is to use a pad between them. Any size needed, easy-peasy. Dear sir, this thread is not about HOW to get signal into a preamp. It is about creative uses of said preamp to drive outboard devices. This is why I've made my impassioned plea to set aside the dither talk before the original point of this thread gets buried. It seems rather evident that there are numerous folks on this site who have extremely nice gear and some who have budget gear and everything in between. I am trying to start a conversation about creative uses of said equipment, a conversation which for the most part is all but void on the interwebs and somehow it gets steered into a side topic at best. I can go google dither hardware inserts and find conversations from 2009 with Bob O making the same claims, there's even a thread from a few months ago here on RGO about the EXACT SAME topic. I appreciate his passion, truly I do. But why this thread? I didn't start this conversation to discuss what's wrong with digital software, its more so about showcasing analog solutions that could be possible in everyone's studio but is not self evident. I'm running signal through my converters into my mic pres into my dbx right now. I plan on posting evidence that shows there's a very strong difference between using a buffered output from a DAC into a compressor than there is to take that same output, feed it into a mic preamp (however you like to do it) and feed that signal into your hardware compressor. Why is this a valid point? Because a good deal of folks do not own analog consoles, especially fancy ones, but they might own stand alone mic pres, or a stereo mic preamp, that sit idle during mixdown or better yet, only sees use during mixdown but not during post tracking sessions, where you're printing tracks through your hardware. Seriously, if you have a very nice sounding dbx or opto compressor, the combination of that with a Neve or other cool transformer coupled preamp feeding it gain changes up the way things sound and creates a new level of tone that by itself won't be possible. Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 6, 2016 14:11:05 GMT -6
I'll be running those tests today....The ones where I use signal from a DAC into a mic preamp into a HW compressor Thanks for all the sidebar commentary, but for the love of Pete can we please stick to the OP? It feels like we went from football to pop tarts. LOL Thanks -L.
|
|
|
Post by illacov on Dec 5, 2016 20:34:51 GMT -6
I use Cockos Reaper as my main DAW of choice. I record @ 24 bits 44.1khz. I mix at 24 bits 44.1khz, my converters are 24 bit.
I tried out several dithering plugins out last night before my hardware insert loop to test your premise out. Perhaps because I'm already at 24 bits, the test would be skewed??
But I didn't hear any appreciable difference between using Psychodither and not, if anything it made the audio sound weird to set the Dither to 24 bits and to improve the resolution of the plugin. I tried several other dither plugins as well.
I'm also pointing out that this conversation is about using your hardware for mixing purposes in creative ways. This is turning into a Dithering thread and there's already a thread for that. How bout some creative uses for HW with an ITB setup? Anybody care to share anything besides dithering theories?
I promise I'll get some clips up tmw. Sheesh!
Thanks -L.
|
|