|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Oct 2, 2016 19:04:47 GMT -6
The age old question (since 1995). My ears tell me that there is no comparison between the 2. Pros still mix on consoles. 32 channels (or more) of high end eq's, patched in compressors or console equipped comps, reverb sends to top shelf hardware effects. So, is it miles apart?? The result?
No. A pragmatic look tells me one can get a great result without all that. But, alas, the difference in an electric signal path and a digital one are apparent. To me at least.
What's the cost vs gain take on this? If I were running a for profit studio, my money would be in analog.
That said, the music business sucks. Little money to be made. So, are we doing this for posterity or what?
Chime in and lets dish.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 2, 2016 20:45:23 GMT -6
My view has certainly changed in the last three years - because of the end game. Sometimes the reward isn't worth the investment. Why have a Steinway that you have to tune every week when you could just use a plug that 99% of the people couldn't spot? There's a middle ground to all of this. You don't have to own a 32 channel console to make great music...but if you want the same sound there are cheaper ways to do it. Summing - even 8 channels of it - makes an enormous difference imo. But I also combine plugs with that. The industry doesn't make enough consistent money to carry on working the same way.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,952
|
Post by ericn on Oct 2, 2016 20:59:26 GMT -6
I'm going to sound like a broken record, the problem with most of today's DSP efforts is that DSP is being used to try and recreate what has already been done with analog! DSP has great promise to create new tools, tools we have dreamed of but so much of the talent that could be used creating those new tools is spending there time trying to recreate what we have in the analog world for a lot less money! Ok we are at this point for the most part because the world will pay for another cheap Pultec, Neve, API etc if it comes closer and or is cheaper, so yeah it's really the fault of us who would benefit if there were more like Exponential Audio , Sonox and others who push the digital envolope ! I do think the potential in DSP is there it's just that we the buyers have to drive the market so that the talent that can give us new tools isn't wasting their skills on a better/ cheaper 1176!
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 2, 2016 21:38:12 GMT -6
Plugins are great. But no comparison to outboard gear. Zero doubts.
Can you afford analog gear? I dunno. Can you afford not to use analog gear? I can't.
A single side by side comparison may lead one to believe there's not much difference. But stack up 20 pieces of analog outboard vs. 20 plugins and tell me there's no difference or minimal difference? I don't think so.
Relying exclusively on plugins is like showing up to a gunfight with a pocket knife. Yeah, you can still win, but you have to be WAY better. Conversely, if you HAD used analog gear, it would have been so much easier, and so much better.
I still use plugins. AFTER all my outboard is instantiated on inserts. Hybrid style.
My (obviously) EXTREMELY biased opinion.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Oct 3, 2016 7:43:40 GMT -6
I think it comes down to the money/workflow ratio. It takes a lot of money to have great mics, a good tracking and mixing room, plus a hardware console with EQ's, insert gear and FX gear, but for those people who have the money and the gear the workflow is easy. The bigger/more expensive the studio and console is, the easier the tracking and mixing workflow is.
The genius of the DAW is how easy it made workflow easy in it's imitation of the endless console. Now, we're in an in between phase where you can use the DAW for certain things it does and also have have multi channel analog stem summing mixing with hardware inserts chains (compressor->EQ-etc) otb that are pre fader. So, for less money you are getting into a more and more analog world.
The other element is recall. It seems a lot of pro mixers have set-and-forget hardware settings for specific tasks. There is also some movement in hardware consoles with automatic recall beyond automation.
Personally, I'm gradually going more and more analog, because I simply want to know the difference and have the money to do so. I didn't have the money to do it all at once, so I'm doing it incrementally.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 3, 2016 15:21:16 GMT -6
I wish that I could buy something like an apollo and 1500 bucks worth of plugs and get stuff to sound as good as my outboard, and more importantly make the creative process as easy for me to do.
At some point, I will sell all my outboard and use that money to travel...
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Oct 3, 2016 15:37:18 GMT -6
Plugins are great. But no comparison to outboard gear. Zero doubts. Can you afford analog gear? I dunno. Can you afford not to use analog gear? I can't. A single side by side comparison may lead one to believe there's not much difference. But stack up 20 pieces of analog outboard vs. 20 plugins and tell me there's no difference or minimal difference? I don't think so. Relying exclusively on plugins is like showing up to a gunfight with a pocket knife. Yeah, you can still win, but you have to be WAY better. Conversely, if you HAD used analog gear, it would have been so much easier, and so much better. I still use plugins. AFTER all my outboard is instantiated on inserts. Hybrid style. My (obviously) EXTREMELY biased opinion. I made this observation a few years ago with my first small format cheapo shitty live console by A+H. Than I broke my own observation and started several times the "gunfight"- driven by the wish of true totall recall. But its true using a small console, and a few pieces of real gear makes it sound like a record... at least my ears tell me that. I wont go back to pure ITB.
|
|
|
Post by forgotteng on Oct 3, 2016 17:58:46 GMT -6
I think some times ITB trains me to cheat and be lazy. When I choose to use a plug in instead of patch in a piece of hardware it is often a compromise. There are times I question the phase relationship of patching hardware. I would love to have someone stop by the studio to help me second guess my workflow. At the end of the day hardware feels better to me and sounds deeper and wider.
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Oct 4, 2016 12:20:00 GMT -6
Never worked on tape but I would not want to from an artistic standpoint. Nowadays a lot of music makers self record, how easy would that be if tape were the recording medium of today? My answer is not many and many big studios would be thriving still. The analog realm is real life electrical voltage and physical energy and when that marries with great performance and instruments that's when the magic happens! It's also a feeling, something tangible, and the interaction is more intuitive than a mouse and screen. I don't own much HW and I definitely know the difference between UAD Apollo Pre amp and the gtq2 preamp, the wa76 and UAD/ waves. I look forward to building up HW to help make an efficient workflow sound better
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Oct 4, 2016 13:05:54 GMT -6
I wish that I could buy something like an apollo and 1500 bucks worth of plugs and get stuff to sound as good as my outboard, and more importantly make the creative process as easy for me to do. At some point, I will sell all my outboard and use that money to travel... cheers Wiz When you do, be sure to come back and see us again!
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Oct 4, 2016 13:07:47 GMT -6
Plugins are great. But no comparison to outboard gear. Zero doubts. Can you afford analog gear? I dunno. Can you afford not to use analog gear? I can't. A single side by side comparison may lead one to believe there's not much difference. But stack up 20 pieces of analog outboard vs. 20 plugins and tell me there's no difference or minimal difference? I don't think so. Relying exclusively on plugins is like showing up to a gunfight with a pocket knife. Yeah, you can still win, but you have to be WAY better. Conversely, if you HAD used analog gear, it would have been so much easier, and so much better. I still use plugins. AFTER all my outboard is instantiated on inserts. Hybrid style. My (obviously) EXTREMELY biased opinion. I made this observation a few years ago with my first small format cheapo shitty live console by A+H. Than I broke my own observation and started several times the "gunfight"- driven by the wish of true totall recall. But its true using a small console, and a few pieces of real gear makes it sound like a record... at least my ears tell me that. I wont go back to pure ITB. I go back and forth sometimes because of convenience. But all my best stuff has been done through my old cheap Ghost.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Oct 4, 2016 13:53:41 GMT -6
I'm more convinced that my ears want analog than ever. I've done lots of comparing in the last couple years.
It just sounds better to me. That's about all there is to it.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Oct 4, 2016 14:12:33 GMT -6
I made this observation a few years ago with my first small format cheapo shitty live console by A+H. Than I broke my own observation and started several times the "gunfight"- driven by the wish of true totall recall. But its true using a small console, and a few pieces of real gear makes it sound like a record... at least my ears tell me that. I wont go back to pure ITB. I go back and forth sometimes because of convenience. But all my best stuff has been done through my old cheap Ghost. If the mix sucks its not convenient it just sounds bad.... I think my real gear mixes are faster, more easy to do, and I have more FUN. To me FUN is what music, and everything what is related to it, is about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2016 16:02:00 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 5, 2016 9:44:43 GMT -6
So, the topic is too broad, IMO, for particularly meaningful discussion....but, let me give you a SINGLE, as yet unmentioned case for digital: gain staging to maintain unity. This isn't TECHNICALLY an analog/digital divide--you could always HAVE put more granular gain staging on desks (but they didn't)....and when you start talking about using all outboard--literally NEVER the case "in the day", you CAN typically adjust their output stage to not add or subtract gain compared to bypass (if they also have proper bypass)....and by the same token if you use the channel EQ in a DAW, they typically don't have an offset on it's output and most plug ins' algos to keep it at unity actually increase it. But, in PRACTICE....in implementation....it is, in the current world, a case for mixing in a software DAW. The algos to do this are hit and miss....and should likely be implemented at the DAW level-taking it out of the hands of the people who need to sell you their wares as being great sounding-nothing you insert pre fader will change the perceived output level....ideally. The reason the algos are hit and miss is that that the very process is less than black and white....if a limiter reduces the peaks of a tom by 3db only 4 times in a song, it's not appropriate to add 4 db of gain to the output. But, if a vocal track has 25db of peak level reduction, again....you can't add 25, but you've got to add something....you add more of what I'd estimate is the RMS change....at 25 peak, that's likely 8-10db of actual RMS reduction....that needs to be made up for....anyway-this is a hugely important concept, because for effectively the first time in mix engineering history, you can actually make the decision whether a knob you're turing is ACTUALLY making something sound better, or simply louder. Cumulatively, that adds up. Also, something an argument I'd have never made when I was younger, I'll make now....let's SAY, for the sake of this discussion, that AnalogHistoricalUnitX isn't and can't be 100% modeled to complete accuracy in the digital domain. So what? What you would have to prove is that no digital option for doing whatever processing AHUX is doing can do it as well or better. The NEED for one specific tool is....limiting in the long run. Millions of great sounding records have been made with literally millions of interchangeable combinations of gear and rooms and people. But, mainly, focus on the first. The second point is actually dependent on it.
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Oct 5, 2016 10:04:02 GMT -6
Plugins are great. But no comparison to outboard gear. Zero doubts. Can you afford analog gear? I dunno. Can you afford not to use analog gear? I can't. A single side by side comparison may lead one to believe there's not much difference. But stack up 20 pieces of analog outboard vs. 20 plugins and tell me there's no difference or minimal difference? I don't think so. Relying exclusively on plugins is like showing up to a gunfight with a pocket knife. Yeah, you can still win, but you have to be WAY better. Conversely, if you HAD used analog gear, it would have been so much easier, and so much better. I still use plugins. AFTER all my outboard is instantiated on inserts. Hybrid style. My (obviously) EXTREMELY biased opinion. I''m with drbill on this. I Love analog and love the workflow and recall of digital. So it's outboard first, inserted on the most crucial mix elements... then plugins - all configured in a hybrid setup. I need to be able to recall instantly. My recall is less that 30 seconds on any session. And being able to recall that quickly with complete accuracy has brought me a lot of work. As good as digital is getting, Analog gives me bigger payoff where sound matters most.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 5, 2016 10:15:18 GMT -6
Plugins are great. But no comparison to outboard gear. Zero doubts. Can you afford analog gear? I dunno. Can you afford not to use analog gear? I can't. A single side by side comparison may lead one to believe there's not much difference. But stack up 20 pieces of analog outboard vs. 20 plugins and tell me there's no difference or minimal difference? I don't think so. Relying exclusively on plugins is like showing up to a gunfight with a pocket knife. Yeah, you can still win, but you have to be WAY better. Conversely, if you HAD used analog gear, it would have been so much easier, and so much better. I still use plugins. AFTER all my outboard is instantiated on inserts. Hybrid style. My (obviously) EXTREMELY biased opinion. I''m with drbill on this. I Love analog and love the workflow and recall of digital. So it's outboard first, inserted on the most crucial mix elements... then plugins - all configured in a hybrid setup. I need to be able to recall instantly. My recall is less that 30 seconds on any session. And being able to recall that quickly with complete accuracy has brought me a lot of work. As good as digital is getting, Analog gives me bigger payoff where sound matters most. So you don't change any settings on your analog outboard?
|
|
|
Post by subspace on Oct 5, 2016 10:21:21 GMT -6
I'm just not good enough to make great mixes ITB. I put the tracks up on the desk, patch in some outboard to tuck in the pointy stuff, massage the faders for a few passes and look for the a-ha moments. They never come ITB for me. I know there are better mixers than I that can make the DAW sit-up and perform whatever tricks they want, but I've tried since 2001 and it just lays there indifferent to my pointing and clicking. I believe I'm doomed to finish my mixing days on analog crutches, but there are worse fates.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 5, 2016 10:22:18 GMT -6
I try to keep my outboard as static (setting wise) as possible as I know where the sweet spots are from long term use over the years. For a project, I'll consider tweaking things as I go, but again, try to keep it the same if possible, using trims before and after the analog insert point to drive the unit to where I like it. Basic overall analog setup gets documented in a text file that goes with the project. Individual tweaks (if necessary) get notated in each tracks comments window. I wish my recall only took 30 seconds, but generally it's under 3-4 minutes.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 5, 2016 10:43:07 GMT -6
I try to keep my outboard as static (setting wise) as possible as I know where the sweet spots are from long term use over the years. For a project, I'll consider tweaking things as I go, but again, try to keep it the same if possible, using trims before and after the analog insert point to drive the unit to where I like it. Basic overall analog setup gets documented in a text file that goes with the project. Individual tweaks (if necessary) get notated in each tracks comments window. I wish my recall only took 30 seconds, but generally it's under 3-4 minutes. I assume you're not using any outboard eq's? Can we see a pic of your current racks/outboard?
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 5, 2016 12:58:09 GMT -6
I try to keep my outboard as static (setting wise) as possible as I know where the sweet spots are from long term use over the years. For a project, I'll consider tweaking things as I go, but again, try to keep it the same if possible, using trims before and after the analog insert point to drive the unit to where I like it. Basic overall analog setup gets documented in a text file that goes with the project. Individual tweaks (if necessary) get notated in each tracks comments window. I wish my recall only took 30 seconds, but generally it's under 3-4 minutes. I assume you're not using any outboard eq's? Can we see a pic of your current racks/outboard? Yes, I am using EQ's, but as you can probably imagine, they are the exception to the rule. Luckily, several are utiilizing greyhill switches, so pretty easy to recall. But yeah, most EQ's are ITB with API style and Silver Bullet EQ's on outboard. I think I posted pics of the new room here somewhere.... I'll see if I can find the link.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 5, 2016 13:02:05 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 5, 2016 13:18:19 GMT -6
Seen this before. More looking for some rack shots, just to see what you're really working with these days.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Oct 5, 2016 13:37:17 GMT -6
I try to keep my outboard as static (setting wise) as possible as I know where the sweet spots are from long term use over the years. For a project, I'll consider tweaking things as I go, but again, try to keep it the same if possible, using trims before and after the analog insert point to drive the unit to where I like it. Basic overall analog setup gets documented in a text file that goes with the project. Individual tweaks (if necessary) get notated in each tracks comments window. I wish my recall only took 30 seconds, but generally it's under 3-4 minutes. How is it possible to keep a vocal compressor's settings static, if you have clients with all kinds of vocal melodies with different dynamic ranges? Imagine Tom Waits and Axl Rose coming into a studio. No way you can use a static compressor setting and get good results for each.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 5, 2016 14:26:03 GMT -6
I try to keep my outboard as static (setting wise) as possible as I know where the sweet spots are from long term use over the years. For a project, I'll consider tweaking things as I go, but again, try to keep it the same if possible, using trims before and after the analog insert point to drive the unit to where I like it. Basic overall analog setup gets documented in a text file that goes with the project. Individual tweaks (if necessary) get notated in each tracks comments window. I wish my recall only took 30 seconds, but generally it's under 3-4 minutes. How is it possible to keep a vocal compressor's settings static, if you have clients with all kinds of vocal melodies with different dynamic ranges? Imagine Tom Waits and Axl Rose coming into a studio. No way you can use a static compressor setting and get good results for each. First, these days, I AM my own client. Also, I'm doing mostly instrumental work, but I absolutely can keep settings similar - if not exact when working with vocals. LA2a or LA3a's and 1176's are my favorites, and they can absolutely stay the same with DAW trims into and out of them keeping them in the sweet spot - trims keeping the compression where I want it. Try it. You'll be surprised. Cutting with compression also helps. if you've got serious problematic issues to deal with, then yeah, you're going to have to tweak the comps, but if I need to go there, I make notes in my PT sessions. Also, I have different comps set up differently, and depending on the vocals "needs", I'll choose a different compressor if one isn't working, or cascade them. If you only have ONE compressor, that makes this approach a lot more difficult. But this is how a lot of the big boys with tons of outboard do it - they are not tweaking and having to recall constantly - they are just switching to a different comp if they need to. Not all gear is getting used all the time. This is the analog solution for "recall" in an ITB world. (Please Note: I'm not a big boys mixer... But I know how they are doing it.)
|
|