|
Post by gregwurth on Feb 4, 2016 0:28:05 GMT -6
gregwurth sending you some files Brother. Also, I see you have a Burl B2 in the rack there. That's what I used to capture on this end so that will help with the comparison. What are your converters calibrated to? Mine are -16
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Feb 4, 2016 6:35:10 GMT -6
gregwurth sending you some files Brother. Also, I see you have a Burl B2 in the rack there. That's what I used to capture on this end so that will help with the comparison. What are your converters calibrated to? Mine are -16 -16 here as well. Apogee Symphony feeding the console.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 4, 2016 9:44:48 GMT -6
Good to see you joining in here Greg. Cowboycoalminer's tracks are always well made, so they'll make a great test for comparing mixers. Can't wait to hear some things. Congratulations, and good luck.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 4, 2016 16:04:58 GMT -6
I think you meant the post above for Cowboycoalminer Greg.
|
|
|
Post by gregwurth on Feb 4, 2016 18:24:16 GMT -6
What are your converters calibrated to? Mine are -16 -16 here as well. Apogee Symphony feeding the console. I got the Stems. Can you give us some details on the chain that you used to print your buss mix? Also the stems are completely ITB?
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Feb 4, 2016 19:55:17 GMT -6
-16 here as well. Apogee Symphony feeding the console. I got the Stems. Can you give us some details on the chain that you used to print your buss mix? Also the stems are completely ITB? Sure. The Stems are completely ITB, yes. I simply routed everything to stereo aux channels and bounced those. All the FX are printed to an aux as well. For my print, I mixed hybrid to the console using no external fx, eq, or compression of any kind. So in essence, the stems should be the same minus the the run through the console channels (basically a summing box as it were). The console is a highly modified Soundcraft Ghost for those that don't know. The capture was through a Burl B2.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Feb 27, 2016 20:59:17 GMT -6
Whatever happened with this?
|
|
|
Post by gregwurth on Mar 3, 2016 16:48:14 GMT -6
I've been mixing under deadline for the new Steve Vai project so I haven't had a chance to put these stems through the Oracle yet. I am planning to get to it next week. Sorry about the delay!
|
|
|
Post by gregwurth on Mar 9, 2016 19:48:15 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by porkyman on Mar 10, 2016 3:13:52 GMT -6
i like c. best. then a. both b and c hype the vocals a bit. thats why i think
a. is itb b. oracle c. ghost
i say b is oracle because the balance shifts were the most extreme between a and b, and i expect the oracle to have more of a sonic footprint than the ghost.... this is of coarse dependent on a. being the itb mix. if b is the the itb i would suspect a. is the oracle, if that makes any sense. listening to soundcloud through computer btw and on 2nd pass i cant really hear the differences anymore, so i could be way off. LOL.
|
|
|
Post by jin167 on Mar 10, 2016 3:30:42 GMT -6
I liked the C best. Have no idea which one it is tho ha.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Mar 10, 2016 10:04:11 GMT -6
Great post, thanks guys. I think mix one is ITB, mix 2 and 3 are the summing mixers. Technically, mix 3 had more punch, so if I was analyzing the sound, I'd say that's the "better" track, but, I prefer mix 2. There was just something pro about how the tracks felt glued. I think it balanced all the parts better, the guitars didn't seem as separated, it felt like they were playing together.
I'd gladly use whatever made 2 or 3 though, the difference is splitting hairs between those two.. 3 had a little more power, but 2 got my feet tapping.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Mar 10, 2016 10:15:25 GMT -6
I like b the best. I think C is the Oracle and A is ITB. A felt the harshest and C least harsh to my ears.
|
|
|
Post by gregwurth on Mar 10, 2016 12:28:07 GMT -6
Interesting to hear your thoughts. If you guys can try to listen to raw files from dropbox and A/B them in your DAW at full res 96k 32/or 24 bit if possible. Curious to see if you guys feel the same as what you hear from the Sound Cloud
|
|
|
Post by javamad on Mar 10, 2016 13:16:04 GMT -6
I listened to the 32 bit files
I struggled to differentiate B and C .. but my room isn't very good. I definitely thought that A was harsher than the other two .. for example at 2:10 with that lead guitar
B and C seemed to have longer vocal reverb tails ... (something I have read people comment about summed mixes) VERY interesting if you put them out of phase and compare ...
If you compare A with phase inverted against C ... you can actually still hear the song at a quiet level, especially the vocals. The vocals sound dry. If you compare B with phase inverted against C ... you can hear a pumping in the bass, and a huge vocal reverb. If you compare A with phase inverted against B ... you can hear a pumping bass, and a huge vocal reverb ... not the same difference as B against C but similar.
so .. I´m not sure what I´m hearing to be honest.
I will watch this thread with interest.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Mar 10, 2016 14:35:45 GMT -6
Very cool. Can't wait to check these out.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Mar 10, 2016 15:03:54 GMT -6
Interesting to hear your thoughts. If you guys can try to listen to raw files from dropbox and A/B them in your DAW at full res 96k 32/or 24 bit if possible. Curious to see if you guys feel the same as what you hear from the Sound Cloud Nope. It's all in my head. I downloaded the 24/96 files. Tossed them into abxer and can't consistently tell them apart. I was using my Tascam UH-7000 DAC and Senny HD650 headphones. Might get a different result through the monitors. Haven't spend a ton of time with them, but with the 10 minutes I spent I don't feel confident in picking a best. I guess that's reason enough to keep my wallet in my pocket though.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Mar 10, 2016 15:26:50 GMT -6
They are all three very close? C had more round transients and I liked it. One must have been the ITB version which is not bad at all.
Will listen tomorrow again with fresh ears.
|
|
|
Post by gregwurth on Mar 10, 2016 16:57:52 GMT -6
I will upload a video tomorrow where I loop different sections and solo each mix for a few rounds and then reveal which mix is which. It's very close and I am impressed that the ITB mix sounds as good as it does. Stay Tuned..
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Mar 10, 2016 18:56:30 GMT -6
Did listen to it again and I guess C is the summing unit because its a little more coherent, less hyped HF range etc. Does those tracks have seen a lot of hardware in tracking?
Using a console or an active summing unit makes sense to me. Mixing feels more easy on it and that is a +++ argument for buying one.
ITB I always struggle with the low end. Fader up fader down - fader moves are unforgiving ITB.
The real live test is mixing the song from scratch with Oracle. I am pretty sure mixing on Oracle leads the OP to better mix decissions.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Mar 10, 2016 19:26:36 GMT -6
I like C>B>A, but it's close. I'll call mix A ITB since it sounds a little "smaller" (yeah, what does that mean?).
So far, mix A is being tagged as ITB by most RGO critical listeners. It will be verrrry interesting if we are wrong about which is which.
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Mar 10, 2016 20:50:03 GMT -6
Lots of odd, false sounding bottom in C. I'd say that A is the in the box mix. I hope that C isn't the Oracle.
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Mar 10, 2016 23:07:31 GMT -6
Well, since it's my ghost, I hope I can pick it out a a lineup. B sounds like my console to my ears. I think C is the Oracle because it's sounds very API'ish to me. But I don't know. Could be hard for me to pick since I'm listening back through the same console as one of the prints.
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Mar 10, 2016 23:23:03 GMT -6
They all sound very similar though. Mix A might be my mine. Too close to call really.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 10, 2016 23:23:13 GMT -6
I think A- ITB B - Ghost C - Oracle
Don't know which I like better between B & C...only listened to a chorus though
|
|