|
Post by Johnkenn on May 15, 2021 12:38:37 GMT -6
Asked this over at the Uadforum - is the 2500 plug and this new console version of the 2500 the exact same thing? Like if I want to save a little computer usage, I could take the console 2500 out and drop the plug 2500 in and it be the exact same thing?
|
|
|
Post by nobtwiddler on May 15, 2021 12:41:19 GMT -6
Yes... Same mix, same settings, maybe a few level changes because it was going thru the 2Buss+ !
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 15, 2021 12:54:31 GMT -6
OK, I figured I'd post this cause of the above post. So I bought the new API / Luna strip. Sounds great, I'm digging it. Pulled up an old track, mixed it without vocals, via Luna in the box! Even used the 2500 on the mix buss! Simple mix, drums, a few electric guitars, and acoustics. Sounded great... Then I had a bit more free time, so I thought I would give the same mix another go, routing everything thru the Dangerous 2Buss +. Using the same plugs / settings, just really adjusting the levels to make things similar to mix #1... The difference was very noticeable. Actually, I was quite amazed that I even thought the ITB mix sounded good ! Go figure. It's my guess I'm still not good enough mixing totally ITB as yet? But who knows? This is the third time I've done this type of comparison, using DP, PT, and now Luna... But each and every time, the mix sent to either my console, remote rig, or the 2BUSS + always sounded better. and what I mean by better, bigger, wider, and with more depth. The ITB mixes always sounded cleaner, and a bit crisper if that means anything. Each instrument, was more identifiable, and less glued, a bit like everything was placed on a flat surface? For lack of a better term, like a quick ruff mix. It seemed to me that the mixes sent to the mixers / summers, melded together better, much more of a final mix. At least to me. It could simply be, this is what I'm used to...remember I've been mixing thru analog consoles since I opened my first studio in 72. So I'm a bit biased to say the least. Next thing to try will be to keep those settings, and run thru my little Helios / Api / Neve rig. Now that said, I'm really digging the Luna workflow, and Luna in general. I know it's not the the software, it's must be me... I'm, gonna need more beer! Much more!!! Great post...how hard were you hitting the busses? I did notice I had to push my drums way more than I’m used to to start getting a little API crunch - and then back off a little. Which is what I’d expect with summing and a console. I’ve never had enough I/O to be able to send more than 6 stereo pairs to any summing unit I’ve had - and even that made a big difference. I guess the goal is to have what you’ve got in that Helios rig - separate outs going into a line pre that can drive into separate Ins in a console. But I don’t have the scratch...that requires dozens more outs, cables, dozens more mic pres (to get the most out of the summing box), etc. I mean - it’s basically a console. Anyway - what I thought was interesting is that my API mix had a different tonal quality - more focused in the mids - maybe more detailed - and I liked that. When I think of all the money I’d have to spend to get the full summing experience - and the fact that I don’t have to PRINT - it makes me think that $524 is a value.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 15, 2021 12:59:13 GMT -6
Yes... Same mix, same settings, maybe a few level changes because it was going thru the 2Buss+ ! Wouldn’t a more fair comparison be taking all of the new API stuff off of the mix, remixing with other stuff and then doing the 2bus+? I thought the new API console emus were part of UA’s API full console emu.
|
|
|
Post by javamad on May 15, 2021 13:14:31 GMT -6
On the comparison to summing … I recently went ITB because of LUNA. In particular with the Neve Summing.
I had an RND 5060 and some outboard which I have now sold. I generally had Zulu on the 2-bus too. Now I have the UA Master tape.
My mixes have never sounded better. I did do a few side by side tests … it is of course tricky to get the levels all scientific … but both my studio buddy and I felt Luna + Neve Summing + Master Tape was really close. So we sold the summing and outboard and got 16 channels of real pres (API, BAE, etc) to get good colour on the way in. So far very happy.
|
|
|
Post by nobtwiddler on May 15, 2021 15:23:50 GMT -6
Well as Java said,
My in the box stuff sounds better then it ever did when using Luna, PERIOD! But my point is the stemmed to 16 outs or more mixes ALWAYS SOUND BETTER! Why, I haven't a clue. but they do. And everyone in the room agrees... Now this result wasn't only while using Luna, it's the same deal when using PT & or DP and mixing ITB.
And John, maybe your idea of not using the API and going thru my stuff is correct, I dunno? All I wanted to do was stem it out without changing much of anything. And with the 2 Buss +, that is basically what I did. The difference was quite noticeable!
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 15, 2021 15:32:41 GMT -6
I don’t take issue with the better, but how much better and at what cost? Good itb mixes are getting closer and closer, so that value proposition question gets more niggly.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 15, 2021 16:44:41 GMT -6
Well as Java said, My in the box stuff sounds better then it ever did when using Luna, PERIOD! But my point is the stemmed to 16 outs or more mixes ALWAYS SOUND BETTER! Why, I haven't a clue. but they do. And everyone in the room agrees... Now this result wasn't only while using Luna, it's the same deal when using PT & or DP and mixing ITB. And John, maybe your idea of not using the API and going thru my stuff is correct, I dunno? All I wanted to do was stem it out without changing much of anything. And with the 2 Buss +, that is basically what I did. The difference was quite noticeable! The 2bus+ is interesting to me - a single and convenient box. I’ve wanted to try one for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 15, 2021 16:52:22 GMT -6
Well as Java said, My in the box stuff sounds better then it ever did when using Luna, PERIOD! But my point is the stemmed to 16 outs or more mixes ALWAYS SOUND BETTER! Why, I haven't a clue. but they do. And everyone in the room agrees... Now this result wasn't only while using Luna, it's the same deal when using PT & or DP and mixing ITB. And John, maybe your idea of not using the API and going thru my stuff is correct, I dunno? All I wanted to do was stem it out without changing much of anything. And with the 2 Buss +, that is basically what I did. The difference was quite noticeable! The 2bus+ is interesting to me - a single and convenient box. I’ve wanted to try one for a long time. Me too
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 15, 2021 17:06:02 GMT -6
I’m working on a tune I tracked a while back and have just not gotten around to finishing the second verse. Anyway - mixing without vocal. Did a pass with the API stuff only last night and then a pass like I would normally do it today (with the Neve summing and my usual plugs.) The API track is much louder gonna go back with fresh ears...but I’ll post soon. Not sure one is better than the other but they’re definitely different sounding.
This is kind’ve an interesting phenomenon to me. The API only mix sounds more like classic albums - because you’re somewhat limited...I’m not carving things up with dynamic eq and you really hear the compression...everything definitely has that brighter API (SSL) tone to it. You use what you have and what you have has a certain character.
I kind wondered this with guitar amps a couple years ago. I found myself eq’ing everything the same - like I had a quintessential tone in my head and I “didn’t like” something that didn’t sound like that. So - I’d hear a Fender Champ and would prefer something else...etc. But having all those “non-perfect” tones gives things character - where my guitar tones in my productions were pretty homogeneous. Makes me think there’s something to be said for having one console with these tools and all of the tweaking sucks some of the coolness out of it. Or makes it sound “too perfect.” IDK.
|
|
|
Post by nobtwiddler on May 15, 2021 17:14:00 GMT -6
"Makes me think there’s something to be said for having one console with these tools and all of the tweaking sucks some of the coolness out of it. Or makes it sound “too perfect.”
Bingo
Couldn't of said it better myself!
|
|
|
Post by nobtwiddler on May 15, 2021 19:12:03 GMT -6
The reason I purchased the Dangerous 2Buss +, was because of this:
#1 - Chris Muth's sonic history with his designs are second to none. So the sound quality wasn't an issue, it was a plus! (plus it's built like a tank)
#2 - Since many artists nowadays are likely to ask for mix revisions, this unit is so easy to recall. Especially since there are NO level adjustments on it, just a couple of push buttons to activate the few sonic parameters, on / or off! Since I found the settings I like, I usually leave them set, and if I were to change something it would take about 2 seconds to recall! Everything else is handled by the computer! (a plus)
#3 - The 2Buss + can either be a clean / or colored summing bus, so buy it once, and use it for any type of music mixing as need be.
My 2 cents... Well worth it's price.
Who knows, maybe sometime soon, I'll be able to create a ITB mix as good as a OTB stemmed mix?
As we all know, Every year the digital stuff gets better sonically, and Luna has proved that big time. But for me personally, at this point in time, it's not as good as when it's broken out and stemmed thru a summing mixer, or a mixer of some sort. Try it for yourself & see.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 15, 2021 19:36:58 GMT -6
The reason I purchased the Dangerous 2Buss +, was because of this: #1 - Chris Muth's sonic history with his designs are second to none. So the sound quality wasn't an issue, it was a plus! (plus it's built like a tank) #2 - Since many artists nowadays are likely to ask for mix revisions, this unit is so easy to recall. Especially since there are NO level adjustments on it, just a couple of push buttons to activate the few sonic parameters, on / or off! Since I found the settings I like, I usually leave them set, and if I were to change something it would take about 2 seconds to recall! Everything else is handled by the computer! (a plus) #3 - The 2Buss + can either be a clean / or colored summing bus, so buy it once, and use it for any type of music mixing as need be. My 2 cents... Well worth it's price. Who knows, maybe sometime soon, I'll be able to create a ITB mix as good as a OTB stemmed mix? As we all know, Every year the digital stuff gets better sonically, and Luna has proved that big time. But for me personally, at this point in time, it's not as good as when it's broken out and stemmed thru a summing mixer, or a mixer of some sort. Try it for yourself & see. You’re not helping my gas. Now send me some of those Helios as recompense.
|
|
|
Post by gouge on May 15, 2021 20:32:04 GMT -6
The 2 bus + looks like an excellent tool. Why not build a capi summing box?
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 15, 2021 21:07:30 GMT -6
I’m keen on the CAPI Sumbus and the 2 Bus+
|
|
|
Post by wiz on May 15, 2021 22:14:03 GMT -6
What are the current downsides of using Luna?
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 15, 2021 22:25:02 GMT -6
What are the current downsides of using Luna? You can see earlier in the thread - no HW inserts, rudimentary comping, no freeze - but honestly, it’s pretty great. I often stick to pro tools when mixing just because of speed - and that could just be because of my familiarity with it...and the fact that 90% of what I do and get is tracked on PT. But with templates and versions now, Luna is very doable. Put it this way - I mix my songs in Luna because I feel like there’s something extra there with the summing. Yes, there are alternatives in other daws - but as I’ve said before, Luna’s workflow and setup with tape and summing has made me do things that I wouldn’t have done in PT. In fact, I’ve brought things I learned from Luna into PT. Now I’m wondering if this new bundle is moving me in a positive direction as well.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on May 15, 2021 22:57:50 GMT -6
What are the current downsides of using Luna? You can see earlier in the thread - no HW inserts, rudimentary comping, no freeze - but honestly, it’s pretty great. I often stick to pro tools when mixing just because of speed - and that could just be because of my familiarity with it...and the fact that 90% of what I do and get is tracked on PT. But with templates and versions now, Luna is very doable. Put it this way - I mix my songs in Luna because I feel like there’s something extra there with the summing. Yes, there are alternatives in other daws - but as I’ve said before, Luna’s workflow and setup with tape and summing has made me do things that I wouldn’t have done in PT. In fact, I’ve brought things I learned from Luna into PT. Now I’m wondering if this new bundle is moving me in a positive direction as well. Thanks Just looking at the cost of the add ons ... Some what pricey The cost of the neve summing is the cost of my whole daw.....
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 15, 2021 23:09:17 GMT -6
From an outside perspective, the prices are nuts. I like UA and I used the first two generations of Apollos for several years but moved out of that platform awhile back. I still eye Apollos sometimes and think, "should I give it another go?" but I just can't square the cost. I mean, I spend all of my spare money on studio gear, I'm not averse to gear-spending in general. I actually moved to a more expensive interface (Symphony MKII) when I left UAD-land. But there is just no scenario where I can see myself spending $700 or whatever it is on a plugin extension pack (I'm still sort of unclear on how this package is bought and sold so maybe I'm not understanding something about it). I like UA and I think in a few years Luna might be really cool. I hope it is. More (creative) competition in DAW land is good. But the UAD pricing scheme, to me, seems to be a relic of the days when they really were head and shoulders above others in modeling. I don't think that's been the case for several years now and the plugin economy has changed a lot. The idea of spending $300/plug on stuff you can only run a handful of is just a really hard sell.
BUT I obviously don't have access to UAD's books. Maybe it's working wonderfully and there are still people shelling out hundreds of dollars for single plugs.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 15, 2021 23:23:29 GMT -6
From an outside perspective, the prices are nuts. I like UA and I used the first two generations of Apollos for several years but moved out of that platform awhile back. I still eye Apollos sometimes and think, "should I give it another go?" but I just can't square the cost. I mean, I spend all of my spare money on studio gear, I'm not averse to gear-spending in general. I actually moved to a more expensive interface (Symphony MKII) when I left UAD-land. But there is just no scenario where I can see myself spending $700 or whatever it is an a plugin extension pack (I'm still sort of unclear on how this package is bought and sold so maybe I'm not understanding something about it). I like UA and I think in a few years Luna might be really cool. I hope it is. More (creative) competition in DAW land is good. But the UAD pricing scheme, to me, seems to be a relic of the days when they really were head and shoulders above others in modeling. I don't think that's been the case for several years now and the plugin economy has changed a lot. The idea of spending $300/plug on stuff you can only run a handful of is just a really hard sell. BUT I obviously don't have access to UAD's books. Maybe it's working wonderfully and there are still people shelling out hundreds of dollars for single plugs. No I get it man. Not sure you’re wrong at all. I haven’t bought more than 5 plugs in the last two years from anyone. The thing is IF this was a major breakthrough, then my $524 I’d pay would be a fraction of any summing mixer I could buy. Right at this moment, I kind’ve think the Neve summing suits me better...plus the fact that the API console stuff is no different than just adding the plug. Only difference is you could have the option of putting the stress on the computer or the dsp. That would be nice, but I’m not convinced at this point. I’ve actually thought about buying a satellite so I could just put 1073s on every channel...
|
|
|
Post by wiz on May 15, 2021 23:41:03 GMT -6
From an outside perspective, the prices are nuts. I like UA and I used the first two generations of Apollos for several years but moved out of that platform awhile back. I still eye Apollos sometimes and think, "should I give it another go?" but I just can't square the cost. I mean, I spend all of my spare money on studio gear, I'm not averse to gear-spending in general. I actually moved to a more expensive interface (Symphony MKII) when I left UAD-land. But there is just no scenario where I can see myself spending $700 or whatever it is an a plugin extension pack (I'm still sort of unclear on how this package is bought and sold so maybe I'm not understanding something about it). I like UA and I think in a few years Luna might be really cool. I hope it is. More (creative) competition in DAW land is good. But the UAD pricing scheme, to me, seems to be a relic of the days when they really were head and shoulders above others in modeling. I don't think that's been the case for several years now and the plugin economy has changed a lot. The idea of spending $300/plug on stuff you can only run a handful of is just a really hard sell. BUT I obviously don't have access to UAD's books. Maybe it's working wonderfully and there are still people shelling out hundreds of dollars for single plugs. No I get it man. Not sure you’re wrong at all. I haven’t bought more than 5 plugs in the last two years from anyone. The thing is IF this was a major breakthrough, then my $524 I’d pay would be a fraction of any summing mixer I could buy. Right at this moment, I kind’ve think the Neve summing suits me better...plus the fact that the API console stuff is no different than just adding the plug. Only difference is you could have the option of putting the stress on the computer or the dsp. That would be nice, but I’m not convinced at this point. I’ve actually thought about buying a satellite so I could just put 1073s on every channel... I basically have the 1084 one every channel
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 16, 2021 0:15:27 GMT -6
From an outside perspective, the prices are nuts. I like UA and I used the first two generations of Apollos for several years but moved out of that platform awhile back. I still eye Apollos sometimes and think, "should I give it another go?" but I just can't square the cost. I mean, I spend all of my spare money on studio gear, I'm not averse to gear-spending in general. I actually moved to a more expensive interface (Symphony MKII) when I left UAD-land. But there is just no scenario where I can see myself spending $700 or whatever it is an a plugin extension pack (I'm still sort of unclear on how this package is bought and sold so maybe I'm not understanding something about it). I like UA and I think in a few years Luna might be really cool. I hope it is. More (creative) competition in DAW land is good. But the UAD pricing scheme, to me, seems to be a relic of the days when they really were head and shoulders above others in modeling. I don't think that's been the case for several years now and the plugin economy has changed a lot. The idea of spending $300/plug on stuff you can only run a handful of is just a really hard sell. BUT I obviously don't have access to UAD's books. Maybe it's working wonderfully and there are still people shelling out hundreds of dollars for single plugs. I’ve actually thought about buying a satellite so I could just put 1073s on every channel... How many tracks do you usually have in a mix? It looks like an Octo will get you 20 Neve 1073s at 44.1kHz. Fewer at higher sample rates. I work at 88.2kHz and usually have 40+ tracks so I'd need...a significant investment in Satellites that would all have to be dedicated to just the 1073s if I wanted them on each track. <shudders>
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 16, 2021 1:35:32 GMT -6
I’ve actually thought about buying a satellite so I could just put 1073s on every channel... How many tracks do you usually have in a mix? It looks like an Octo will get you 20 Neve 1073s at 44.1kHz. Fewer at higher sample rates. I work at 88.2kHz and usually have 40+ tracks so I'd need...a significant investment in Satellites that would all have to be dedicated to just the 1073s if I wanted them on each track. <shudders> Maybe about 30-40 average. 24/48. I definitely don’t put one on every channel - what’s the point on stereo room or hat. But I can’t get through a good mix now without compromising. I think another octo would free me to splurge on adding stuff to just add sonic possibilities.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 16, 2021 5:25:25 GMT -6
Frankly,other than the daw, UA has charged premium prices for each of the Luna plug ins and the new API bundle ever more so.
I liked the sound of Luna and the original neve summing, and bought some of the tape extensions, but for me I didn’t want to be bothered learning a new daw, didn’t like the idea of final mixes being tethered to one box( Apollo) and wasn’t prepared to start spending thousands on new UA plugs as, while I liked their sound, the value proposition wasn’t there for me and due to UA’s ongoing used plug in sales policy.
Ragan , Wiz and I have followed similar paths recently, but when I bought back into UA I very consciously was going to limit the plugs ins I bought and I ended up circling through symphony mkii, Apollo X6, and have ended up with Aurora N, which I am very happy with.
I use Ob while tracking then ITB, and very happily use UA plugs while mixing.
I’d just really encourage people to demo Luna plug ins extensively and if you are diving into UA land, do the math and consider what your real total costs will be and consider a multiplier of around $700 (at least),for new bundles (neve, ssl, etc.?)
|
|
|
Post by nobtwiddler on May 16, 2021 7:32:59 GMT -6
At my joint I have a few setups I usually go between for mixing.
But up until this new LUNA Release, I never tracked anything EVER to a computer! I have only tracked to a Radar unit since it's release in 91 No LATENCY, and it sounds absolutely wonderful.
Literally turn it on, arm the tracks you're gonna record to, and go! Done. Amazing unit, with amazing sonics.
And then after tracking was done, I would just send the files out via Ethernet to the computer for mixing... if I was going that route.
So because of a few different things that transpired in the last year I decided to give the computer a try. Firstly, my last minute move to a much smaller space, & of course the pandemic, which lead to much more remote work, and the need for total recall... Obviously the workflow is different.
At this point it's still a learning curve, & comfortability factor for me. As I am NOT a computer person, (actually I loathe them) which is why I bought the Radar originally (still have 3)
At the moment, my UA tracking and or mixing system consists of 2 x Apollo x16's 2 x Apollo x8p's 2 x Satellites, Octos and 1 x Apollo x4 for tracking out of the studio.
Because I was going to try this new UA setup, I figured I'd go all in, just my nature. So I purchased a new Mac Mini, fully blown out, (although not the M1 version!)
Then I went for a bigger curved LG monitor, 38 inch, which made the render meter in Luna, max out, and the entire system crashed constantly. So I purchased a Sonnet "GPU" Puck to handle the new large size monitor, and all was fine.. UNTIL..yesterday,
I just updated to the new Luna / UAD software, and as well as the new API bundle. Now once again, when I open up my mix templet, the render meter is already at, 55 - 60% and this is parked!
Tried a simple 20 channel mix yesterday, and the computer crashed about ten times!
Did I mention I HATE computers!
More to come.... (maybe)
|
|