|
Post by Ward on Jul 12, 2020 6:43:05 GMT -6
I have a few 'vintage' pieces lying around from my early 20s that you might like . . . Alesis Micro Limiter, Micro Gate, Micro Enhancer, Quad gate, DBX 172 Supergate, and a few more! I'm willing to cut you a GREAT deal! Hmm... Such a generous offer! On second thought, maybe Brauer is on to something. All of a sudden, ITB is looking a whole lot better. Plus I can't "take those away" from some creative kid out there, making their "Ode To Billie Eyelash", in their bedroom studio! Chris I'm waiting for Waves to come out with the Alesis Emulator Plugin package before I let go of those babies!
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Jul 12, 2020 10:57:06 GMT -6
Do I understand your thesis right? You say its a diffrence enjoying OTB vs ITB mixes. Thats a good one and opnes the topic hearing psychology.
A scinetific thesis.....
It’s a long discussion.. many layers and facets. The summary is, great wine can be made with cheap grapes.. you have to be a decent chemist, and expect to do a lot of extra work, or just get lucky and happen to have a pretty good crop that taste good! Great wine can also be made with great grapes, and you will still need to be a great chemist. But the amount of work may be less and the control over flavor feel easier, and take it in many directions. In theory, the Absolute best wine is when the best grapes, best crop, best chemists all work together. No compromises. All true. And yet, even the best wine tastes like hell when drinking alone because you're in a fight with your wife. This is just from observation of others, mind you.
|
|
|
Post by donr on Jul 12, 2020 11:09:00 GMT -6
It'll be interesting to listen to the ITB Brauer mixes. He's still got analog compressors he's going through. He must have found something to replace the Neve 33609. It seems all these guys find one setting for the analog boxes and then never touch them after. Just send whatever into them. Makes recall bearable I suppose. He mentioned how easy it was to print stems now compared to previously.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jul 12, 2020 11:21:01 GMT -6
Andrew Sheps in the box philosophy, which I subscribe to, is to eliminate all extra gear. For example analog summing. If you're going to commit to going in the box you've lost everything you gained if you're now trying to rout for and run an analog summing mixer. You're just back where you started again.
I made some progress on my digital mix. It now sounds as good or better as my Midas EQ mix. It was really educational to spend 2-3 hours trying to ear match a track to another track with different tools.
My hardware fixation is microphones and mic preamps, and direct boxes. I think if you go full hog triple martini on that input chain stuff you are way forward in your tracks, whatever you mix with.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jul 12, 2020 12:38:47 GMT -6
I think if you go full hog triple martini on that input chain stuff you are way forward in your tracks, whatever you mix with. Agreed. But IMO that leaves you about....maybe 30-40% in. Going to get the rest with plugins?
|
|
|
Post by drumrec on Jul 12, 2020 14:43:51 GMT -6
My hardware fixation is microphones and mic preamps, and direct boxes. I think if you go full hog triple martini on that input chain stuff you are way forward in your tracks, whatever you mix with. Spot On! It's the same way of working and philosophy that I've had for the last 10 years and I just love it. Good gears with microphones, preamps and commitment with some good compressors on the way in. Since then, I rarely leave ITB for mixing. Uses almost 90% uad plugins that I have used for almost 20 years since they came out with uad-1. Total recall and quick changes in the mix if the customer wishes and I can do that wherever I am. I follow Michael Brauer with interest in the new path he has chosen. Always interesting with changes KR Håkan
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jul 12, 2020 15:23:51 GMT -6
I think if you go full hog triple martini on that input chain stuff you are way forward in your tracks, whatever you mix with. Agreed. But IMO that leaves you about....maybe 30-40% in. Going to get the rest with plugins? Yes, exactly!
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Jul 12, 2020 15:26:39 GMT -6
I think if you're a real "A-List" pro and you really really know what you are doing, after a lot of experimentation you can arrive at an ITB solution that allows you to put out decent work and satisfy the endless need for recalls, etc. The rest of us can simply plug some hardware and get the job done easily with great sonics and tactile feedback, take some pictures, and do the recalls by hand when we need to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2020 15:34:34 GMT -6
I think if you go full hog triple martini on that input chain stuff you are way forward in your tracks, whatever you mix with. Agreed. But IMO that leaves you about....maybe 30-40% in. Going to get the rest with plugins? You really only consider a great capture to be 30-40% of the way along? I feel like if it's that low, then it's not "full hog" or all that great.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jul 13, 2020 15:41:47 GMT -6
Agreed. But IMO that leaves you about....maybe 30-40% in. Going to get the rest with plugins? You really only consider a great capture to be 30-40% of the way along? I feel like if it's that low, then it's not "full hog" or all that great. Could be 40-50%. But if you consider traditional production techniques "post capture" vs. modern DAW production techniques "post capture", there is a LOT more transformers, discrete electronics, bouncing, tape, etc. post capture in the traditional approach. So much so that we often tried as best as possible to avoid as much electronics as possible due to the harmonic "degredation" that we all now seek. That is a huge difference in mojo, harmonic anomalies, color, or whatever you like to call it after the fact.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2020 15:41:47 GMT -6
The day I stopped thinking ITB mixes are lacking in some way is the day I discovered that Tchad Blake is 100% ITB. If you can pull THAT off without any hardware, the only consideration then is your own work-flow and the amount of engagement and enjoyment and efficiency you get out of one method, the other, or a combo of both. I like hardware. I think I get "there" faster using it (especially compression), it's more fun (I get bored real fast just moving a mouse), but in terms of pure sonics... either one clearly works just fine.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jul 13, 2020 15:43:16 GMT -6
but in terms of pure sonics... either one clearly works just fine. To each his own. I don't judge my work flow, sonics or mixing goals based on other people's workflows or choices. Only my own. I know what I like, and I like the hardware sound better than the plugin sound.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2020 15:48:02 GMT -6
but in terms of pure sonics... either one clearly works just fine. To each his own. I don't judge my work flow, sonics or mixing goals based on other people's workflows or choices. Only my own. I know what I like, and I like the hardware sound better than the plugin sound. Right, I get that. I don't either, but that is a subjective thing. I'm thinking objectively about the final result of each approach and I do think that "mojo" is clearly able to be replicated ITB when the right person is doing the work. I'm not as good at that as others, so I, like you, tend to rely on HW more for that part of it. I just think a strong argument in favor of one of the other for any reason other than how you like to do things and what works best for you is kind of moot.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jul 13, 2020 16:04:19 GMT -6
To each his own. I don't judge my work flow, sonics or mixing goals based on other people's workflows or choices. Only my own. I know what I like, and I like the hardware sound better than the plugin sound. I do think that "mojo" is clearly able to be replicated ITB when the right person is doing the work. I might disagree with you there. One man's mojo is another man's ***. And vice versa. To make a categoric statement that plugins CAN achieve what hardware can due to one, two, a dozen or hundreds of peoples work is anything but objective from my perspective. By definition, it's subjective.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Jul 13, 2020 18:31:02 GMT -6
To each his own. I don't judge my work flow, sonics or mixing goals based on other people's workflows or choices. Only my own. I know what I like, and I like the hardware sound better than the plugin sound. Right, I get that. I don't either, but that is a subjective thing. I'm thinking objectively about the final result of each approach and I do think that "mojo" is clearly able to be replicated ITB when the right person is doing the work. I'm not as good at that as others, so I, like you, tend to rely on HW more for that part of it. I just think a strong argument in favor of one of the other for any reason other than how you like to do things and what works best for you is kind of moot.
Mixed pure ITB since 2020... You can recreate "artifacts" ITB...which ones - and do they help or hurt.
I would be a liar to all RGOs and myself if I would hide that drbill posts remind me on the fun part too. Thats why I may go back to my hybrid mixing approach.
It is fun to use fingers in mix time.....
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jul 13, 2020 18:46:18 GMT -6
I do think that "mojo" is clearly able to be replicated ITB when the right person is doing the work. I might disagree with you there. One man's mojo is another man's ***. And vice versa. To make a categoric statement that plugins CAN achieve what hardware can due to one, two, a dozen or hundreds of peoples work is anything but objective from my perspective. By definition, it's subjective. <<thumbsup>> Just remember to use the pan pot when you do!
|
|
|
Post by tkaitkai on Jul 13, 2020 19:10:38 GMT -6
I think ITB mixing can sound awesome, but in order to get there, you have to relinquish the "analog mixing" mindset.
My productions took a drastic leap forward when I stopped trying to create a virtual console in my DAW and embraced digital for what it really excels at — limitless flexibility. Obsessing over which plugin emulations accurately reproduce their HW counterparts is a colossal waste of time, IME. It's infinitely more rewarding to simply focus on making shit sound good (not "analog"), regardless of how absurd or unconventional the approach is.
If I have to EQ match a guitar tone or rip drum samples from a popular song or use 28 plugins on a single track, so be it. It might sound like a lot of work, but if you go into it with the mindset that you're going to make everything sound as awesome as possible as quickly as you can, it becomes super intuitive.
All that matters is what's coming out of the speakers. No one will ever care how you got there. If it works, it works.
That said, I still think analog is incredibly valuable on the front end, and it can certainly make mixing more fun.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,928
|
Post by ericn on Jul 13, 2020 19:24:55 GMT -6
You really only consider a great capture to be 30-40% of the way along? I feel like if it's that low, then it's not "full hog" or all that great. Could be 40-50%. But if you consider traditional production techniques "post capture" vs. modern DAW production techniques "post capture", there is a LOT more transformers, discrete electronics, bouncing, tape, etc. post capture in the traditional approach. So much so that we often tried as best as possible to avoid as much electronics as possible due to the harmonic "degredation" that we all now seek. That is a huge difference in mojo, harmonic anomalies, color, or whatever you like to call it after the fact. Bill don’t forget how much we had to think and plan in the old days. A lot of the mojo was the fact we couldn’t fly by the seat of our pants and make it work in the mix. Every step of tracking we had to make sure it worked.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jul 13, 2020 19:53:44 GMT -6
Could be 40-50%. But if you consider traditional production techniques "post capture" vs. modern DAW production techniques "post capture", there is a LOT more transformers, discrete electronics, bouncing, tape, etc. post capture in the traditional approach. So much so that we often tried as best as possible to avoid as much electronics as possible due to the harmonic "degredation" that we all now seek. That is a huge difference in mojo, harmonic anomalies, color, or whatever you like to call it after the fact. Bill don’t forget how much we had to think and plan in the old days. A lot of the mojo was the fact we couldn’t fly by the seat of our pants and make it work in the mix. Every step of tracking we had to make sure it worked. I haven't forgot. I'm not THAT old yet. But the multiple passes thru analog gear are a HUGE aspect of the sonics. Almost as much as the tape impact - depending on machine - that we used. Digital gives us nothing for free. We gotta EARN it back - the old fashioned way.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Jul 13, 2020 20:49:10 GMT -6
"Smith Barney". "They make money the old fashioned way" "They E-A-R-N it". (John Houseman/1981 TV Commercial) Ah, the days of Shakespearean Stage Legends making Poloroid commercials, and the like! Chris
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,928
|
Post by ericn on Jul 13, 2020 21:29:59 GMT -6
"Smith Barney". "They make money the old fashioned way" "They E-A-R-N it". (John Houseman/1981 TV Commercial) Ah, the days of Shakespearean Stage Legends making Poloroid commercials, and the like! Chris Though the mid WI boy in me may be loyal to Ciderboys ( Stevens Point) Patrick Stewart Strongbow commercial my friend!
|
|
|
Post by OtisGreying on Jul 14, 2020 0:29:08 GMT -6
He will probably get bored with the handful of plugin compressors that don’t suck. Most of them fail horribly at converting sound pressure energy into harmonic energy. Most of them alias. Most plugin compressors simply make your track smaller and shittier. tomegatherion, which ITB compressors do you consider to perform best? I know MB is using a variety of UAD compressors which all internally oversample. Magic Death Eye appears to be very low noise mostly under -175dB on Plugin Doctor, UAD compressors seem to generally have aliasing be below -150dB, which to my knowledge is fairly okay. Anyway, I would love to know which ITB compressors you feel are the most useful especially in terms of "converting sound pressure energy into harmonic energy" if any.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2020 3:42:31 GMT -6
He will probably get bored with the handful of plugin compressors that don’t suck. Most of them fail horribly at converting sound pressure energy into harmonic energy. Most of them alias. Most plugin compressors simply make your track smaller and shittier. tomegatherion, which ITB compressors do you consider to perform best? I know MB is using a variety of UAD compressors which all internally oversample. Magic Death Eye appears to be very low noise mostly under -175dB on Plugin Doctor, UAD compressors seem to generally have aliasing be below -150dB, which to my knowledge is fairly okay. Anyway, I would love to know which ITB compressors you feel are the most useful especially in terms of "converting sound pressure energy into harmonic energy" if any. Buy plugin doctor. Demo plugs in your own work and test them in Plugin Doctor. If you have concerns about the sound quality, try replacing what you're using with a better behaving plugin and see if you can hear a difference on the one track and built up in your mix. I ditched some noisy old plugins recently and everything is deeper and more analog.
Most convert it into harmonic energy except for the ones that do not, have a disgusting hold, and basically act like a fader with random artifacts like some of the Metric Halo Channel Strip comps. Not that your DAW's faders cannot have artifacts; some of the buggier DAWs have measurable and audible artifacts. Most plugin compressors just produce odd order harmonics and partials. That reads nasty and usually sounds nasty. That is how the math proclaims a perfect compressor with good oversampling everywhere and anti-aliasing filters should distort and should work. Should work. There is no such thing as a perfectly clean compressor. Hardware compressors almost universally produce both even order harmonics and odd order harmonics upon gain reduction. The analog components have a box tone and distort in the sidechain and the amplification stage that controls gain when gain is reduced. This is easy to hear in a VCA, where the makeup gain is simply a control voltage that brings the IC back up to where it is cleaner. Compression sounds good because the analog components distort in a pleasing way. It can makes things harmonically more pleasing despite all the IMD and maybe dulling the attack depending on how you set it. The digital compressors that produce only odd order harmonics rarely sound good with anything but a slight gain reduction. They can present a nice harmonic edge with a slight gr to many sources but they're much less flexible than ones with more pleasing harmonics or hardware. The reason some compressors are considered to sound good is because they distort in a pleasing way.
Many plugin compressors, even some that aren't oversampled, don't have audible aliasing in the output. A lot just have it in the sidechain and artifact heavily upon gain reduction of many instruments or build up unnatural and offensive odd order harmonics. The most pressing issues are no box tone, lack of even order harmonics, static harmonics, and very small sweet spots for many plugins. I love Molot oversampled and everything Klanghelm but you must gain stage them correctly. The Glue is still good but isn't hardware. Kotelnikov GE with yin/yang on is great as a mastering compressor but is a bitch to setup on the two bus. The free Kotelnikov is decent but hit or miss. The ability of it to basically remix tracks is what makes it so awesome in mastering and a PITA in mixing. Some of the DMG Trackcomp models are cool. Others are not. Magic Death Eye is fun and I need to play with it more before buying it or using it a mix. It costs a lot but tubes irl can be clean like that. I do not use anything that requires iLok or UAD anymore but several of the UAD plugs are good and have even order harmonics. Many of these plugins are just horrifically overpriced when not on sale and a 1000 dollar hardware compressor will give you more mojo than 3 300 dollar plugs. Even worse value are the pretty but ultra boring ones like Fab Filter Pro-C, which is pretty much just a prettier and maybe slightly cleaner version of whatever came with your DAW but with program-dependent parameters. I love the GUIs and they have a quick workflow but am not a big fan of what the compressor harmonically does. It basically just comes with the more utilitarian Fab Filter plugins in a bundle.
|
|
kcatthedog
Temp
Super Helpful Dude
Posts: 15,077
Member is Online
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jul 14, 2020 5:55:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jul 14, 2020 6:31:21 GMT -6
Odd order harmonics sound fine. Lots of great gear produces odd order harmonics. They are not inherently bad. I'll give you an example, it is said that tape machines produce a fair amount of odd order harmonics when distorted, as well as transformers. Some of the most coveted sounds. This is some sort of public myth or something that odd order harmonics are "bad" or "unmusical."
|
|