#1870368 - 01/10/08 02:59 PM
Using a Mixer and Control Surface
|
fb000
Member
Registered: 12/17/07
Posts: 15
|
Offline
|
|
Is it common to use a mixer and control surface in your setup?
right now I am mixerless and control surface-less running my inputs (fantom) via spdif into a delta 1010 sound card. and my mic through the pre into the delta.
I want to incorporate some outboard gear (compressor, fx and maybe a synth rack module) some decent converters and mixer.
I think everything should input through the mixer, insert and send comnpression and fx...run this through the ad converters...converters spdif out to delta spdif in....delta spdif out to DA conveters spdif in.....DA conveter analogue out back to mixer for monitoring.
Is that normally the way it is setup?
And would one typicallly incorporate a control surface in this
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870410 - 01/10/08 04:36 PM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: fb000]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Unless you absolutely have to, don't do meaningless conversions. You can route out to analog inserts without the need for a console, since we're talking 8 i/o from the 1010 here. Leave the console out of the equation unless that console happens to be a very high end analog board, Trident/Toft, Neve, etc. Otherwise you're putting yet another detrimental break in the digital chain.
Simply use your analog i/o on the 1010 as 8 insert points for analog dynamics and send/returns for fx. If you need more i/o get a second 1010.
Bounce your mix in the box.
Every conversion degrades your audio.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870578 - 01/11/08 04:29 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: audiorulez]
|
Griffinator
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 03/28/02
Posts: 9880
Loc: Lynchburg, VA, USA
|
Online
|
|
Every conversion degrades your audio.
+1
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870706 - 01/11/08 08:03 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: Griffinator]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12277
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I use a mixer going in and going out...and it works beautifully, and IMO sounds better than when if I stay all ITB.
Using an analog mixer with outboard processing just sounds bigger to me, so, after I edit in the DAW I go OTB and do all my mixing and processing with an analog mixer and processing gear.
But...I have 24 A/D/A channels which makes this possible, and I have a fairly substantial assortment of outboard processing. I apply very little if any "spot" processing inside the DAW.
The fact that I am converting a multitude of tracks back to analog and then processing and mixing them together into a stereo mix and then recording that 2-track mix back into the DAW...really wipes away that whole "conversion is bad" perspective, IMO.
But I wouldn't take individual tracks and convert them to analog for processing and the convert them back to digital again as individual tracks.
I won't get into a big debate on the validity or degradation issues of this approach...other than to say I know for a fact many engineers still do it this way because they do hear a difference when mixing/processing OTB in analog...and it sounds better to them (otherwise, why would they be doing it?  )
The thing to do is try it yourself with YOUR equipment and listen carefully to the differences before/after conversions. A lot depends on the converters and all the other gear in your signal chain. IMO, bad digital sounds worse than bad analog…but good analog can sound better than good digital…over course if you have GREAT analog or digital…then it’s a matter of personal preference.
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870714 - 01/11/08 08:30 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: miroslav]
|
Griffinator
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 03/28/02
Posts: 9880
Loc: Lynchburg, VA, USA
|
|
Online
|
|
But I wouldn't take individual tracks and convert them to analog for processing and the convert them back to digital again as individual tracks.
Which is what the OP was speculating about, so, in essence, you're in agreement with myself and AR. (Mark the date in history!)
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870715 - 01/11/08 08:31 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: Griffinator]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12277
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870750 - 01/11/08 09:48 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
I also often run DAW tracks out to an analog console for hardware processing, and also have 24+ DA's to do so. However these are very high end converters, a great sounding vintage console, and some major vintage and modern hardware. If the OP is going to drop coin into a high end analog console, hardware and converters then that's a different story. However the 1010 is hardly high end, and while decent, running through them and then into a console of shall we say modest cost (not to name names but I think you get my drift) would IMHO be very detrimental to the audio quality. This is what I was refering to, and why I recommended skipping the console and simply using the 1010's 8 analog i/o as insert points and send/returns. I typically do this when going from DAW to desk, putting the dynamics processor in between rather in the insert chain, and same is true when I'm running analog multitrack. Nothing wrong with using the insert points, I just prefer to keep the chain as simple as possible.
Surely if the OP wants to drop coin on a vintage Neve, Apogee converters and has a rack of 1176's to put in the chain I would absolutely not discourage them. However I think the OP is not quite ready to drop that kind of coin at this point. OP correct me if I am wrong.
I often, in addition to the console, track to 2"-24 tape then tranfer to DAW. I edit and often trasfer back (edited) to the 2" for mix. My console has automation (mute and VCA) allowing me some final tweaking in the mix stages after the DAW transfer. But, the 2" machine is costly to maintain, and tape is expensive. Not all my clients can afford this luxury, nor do they all have to have this sound that 2" tape yields.
I would not do this with an inferior analog tape machine, as the results would not be nearly the same.
IT all comes down to what the quality of the hardware you're going to and from is really. If the hardware and converters can keep the audio quality from any noticable deterioration, and the hardware is yielding a specific sound the engineer/artist is going for, then it's an advantage. However to do the DAAD conversions just for the sake of "going analog" into lower line gear IMHO is foolish.
OP I hope this info is helpful for you, and feel free to ask any followup questions, we don't bite too hard...:)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870759 - 01/11/08 10:03 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: audiorulez]
|
Griffinator
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 03/28/02
Posts: 9880
Loc: Lynchburg, VA, USA
|
|
Online
|
|
However to do the DAAD conversions just for the sake of "going analog" into lower line gear IMHO is foolish.
exactly.
Until there's at least 5 figures available to drop on a console, and another 1K/channel for converters, it doesn't make a lot of sense to mix OTB unless you're cutting vinyl at the back end, not burning a CD.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870840 - 01/11/08 11:38 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: Griffinator]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12277
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I was just talking about what is possible and what can be done...'cuz sometimes I see people literally "scared" into never doing any conversions. 
I think everyone should always at least try it and see how you like it.
I don't have any "5 figure" gear. Most of it is fairly MOR stuff...but I sure CAN hear a difference when I am listening to the ITB stereo sum compared to when I break it out into 24 D/A channels and sum that same mix through my analog console.
It just gets a lot wider and deeper to my ears.
And it's the same DA either ITB or OTB...'cuz you have to ALWAYS convert anyway in order to hear your mix through the monitors.
So...in reality, you are ALWAYS listening to an OTB/analog audio signal….mine just gets routed through an analog mixer and analog outboard gear, and it just sounds better to me….YMMV.
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870859 - 01/11/08 12:11 PM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: miroslav]
|
Griffinator
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 03/28/02
Posts: 9880
Loc: Lynchburg, VA, USA
|
|
Online
|
|
Looking at the pics of your studio makes me a bit curious, Miro. If you don't mind me asking - what kind of desk are you using right now?
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870902 - 01/11/08 12:56 PM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: Griffinator]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
I'm curious, have you ever done any serious blind testing of summing through your analog chain vs ITB Miro?
While you may think it sounds "better", it may simply be your brain and not your ears telling you so.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870945 - 01/11/08 01:49 PM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12277
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
The desk is a TASCAM M-3500. Certainly not a "5 figure" board...but, it's a pretty good little analog console.
Great headroom, low noise (I spent a lot of time doing all the grounding as best as I could), and pretty nice Pre's and EQ's...though these days I only use outboard Pres. But even though I have a few nice outboard EQs...for most tracks, I just use the ones in the console.
And no, I never put on a blindfold to do sound comparisons...  but I'm telling you this as plainly as I possibly can...
...when I flip from the ITB stereo sum and go to the analog mixer sum, it's like the whole mix goes just a little more 3-D. It's been like that time and time again with most every type of material. So I’m not going to doubt my ears, or worry why it is so.
I'm not just "imagining it"...just 'cuz I like analog. Of course...there’s is no question that I prefer using a real mixer and outboard gear for mixing, but that isn't biasing my ears when I hear the two stereo sums. 
I'm not saying the ITB mix is bad...it just doesn't seem to have as big a stage as the analog mix.
Now, if had some Lavry converters and a Prism DAW system...maybe the ITB mix would blow me away...but at this point, I'm liking the analog sum/mix better....BUT....I could very easily use the ITB mix too if that's all I had.
And you know...my DAW isn't a crappy DAW. It's generally agreed that the Samplitude/Sequoia audio engine is one of the better ones around.
And the converters aren't even an issue here, 'cuz I'm using the same converters to hear the ITB stereo sum as I am to go 24 channels OTB.
What can I say…. *shrug*
Anyway…I don’t think it’s really anything that needs to be debated too severely, because there are others who prefer OTB mixes…and then there are those who prefer ITB mixes.
So, we go with what our ears like better. Done!
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1870960 - 01/11/08 02:04 PM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: miroslav]
|
Griffinator
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 03/28/02
Posts: 9880
Loc: Lynchburg, VA, USA
|
|
Online
|
|
The desk is a TASCAM M-3500. Certainly not a "5 figure" board...
Actually, that did retail for $10,000. Sure, you can buy 'em these days for $3K, but those are used.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1871819 - 01/13/08 08:07 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: Griffinator]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Unless you've done a blind test, you really don't know for sure if which you think sounds better, since you are influenced by other reasoning besides your ears Miro. I've witnessed many a musician who thought they had to have a certain mic or pre in the chain, but when listening without knowing what is what, chose something not of their preference as sounding better.
Our eyes play tricks on our ears all the time, and in the digital age this has become all too common a mistake to believe them. I have made a habit of keeping video monitors off when mixing to take that reference away, as all too often it becomes a non-audible distraction that makes us think we are hearing something we really are not, only our brain is telling us we are and we are deceived into believing it.
I'm all for analog, and I also appreciate it's unique qualities, but often find (by doing such blind tests during tracking and mixing) that the digital track sounds as good or better in some cases. However it is not until I am faced with choosing which sounds better using only my ears can I honestly make that decision.
I'm not saying you are wrong, only that without removing the outside influences can you truly say you prefer one over the other for it's audio qualities.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1871849 - 01/13/08 09:16 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12277
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I'm not sure what "outside influences" would be misleading my ears.
You know...I kinda' sit there at the mix position and listen to the stereo sum coming from the DAW...and then I flip over to the stereo sum coming from the console, and it's just there...the sound differences would be noticed...even by a blind man.
But I know what you are saying about psyching yourself into hearing things when you grab a certain piece of gear that has some "vibe" associated with it...but I'm just sitting back and hitting one button on my console...and having a blindfold with someone else doing that would NOT change my perception of which mix sounds slightly bigger/wider.
And yes, I do often close my eyes and really focus on the sound...so I know how NOT to fool myself about what I am hearing.
It's not a major thing. Most cases, it's not that noticeable...but the mix opens up more through the console.
And bottom line…even if the two mixes were EXACTLY the same, I would still mix with the console and outboard gear over the ITB approach as I like the touchy-feely aspect of real gear. 
I’m not talking bad about the ITB approach…I’m just telling you what is currently working for me.
Grif,
Yeah…OK…you got me there…I guess it can be considered a “5 figure” console!
I bought it new back in 1990…and yeah, at the time I though it was a bit pricey, ‘cuz my budget was rather tight back then. It’s a nice board…and it still has a really good following and loyal user base. They last really well…at least mine has (knock on wood). Going on 18 years now…and NO issues.
I’ve cleaned the faders once…and as with all consoles this old…some of the knobs that I don’t reach for as often, can get just a bit stiff…but it’s still chugging away.
I have a whole 4-channel spare module, along with a spare meter bridge (just the right-side mains)…along with some spare faders, LEDs…etc.
Hope I never need them!
I'm always checking out eBay for what's out there in used consoles...the next upper quality tier.
I almost pulled the trigger twice now on used Trident consoles...and then there was an Amek and an MCI...but, the one Trident I really would have gone for was in CA...and the whole freighting/shipping things looked real messy!
There was a guy in MA recently selling a Trident London console...but first he wanted a bit too much for it, and then he kept killing the listing and then re-listing...just didn't seem kosher. Though last time up he had the price down pretty low for a Trident (I think like $4k)...and it looked real good in the pics.
With something nearby like that...I would go and hear it before buying it.
I may do some more major studio changes/upgrades after this summer...but I'm in the finishing stages of a project, and right now is not the time.
OK...gotta' get off this Internet and go work!
I'm mixing down a song today. (I will compare the ITB and OTB stereo sums again just to confirm. )
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1871873 - 01/13/08 10:04 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
I'm not sure what "outside influences" would be misleading my ears.
That's a no brainer, your eyes and your knowledge of what the source is. If you know that you are listening to the hybrid analog/digital chain, and you have told yourself it's "better" then unconsciously you will think it is if you know it's what you are listening to.
You know...I kinda' sit there at the mix position and listen to the stereo sum coming from the DAW...and then I flip over to the stereo sum coming from the console, and it's just there...the sound differences would be noticed...even by a blind man.
Until you actually play the role of the blind man you can't be sure of this.
But I know what you are saying about psyching yourself into hearing things when you grab a certain piece of gear that has some "vibe" associated with it...but I'm just sitting back and hitting one button on my console...and having a blindfold with someone else doing that would NOT change my perception of which mix sounds slightly bigger/wider.
And yes, I do often close my eyes and really focus on the sound...so I know how NOT to fool myself about what I am hearing.
Again, you cannot say this and be certain until you actually do a blind test, as the influence of what you have trained yourself to think will always be a factor. Just closing your eyes and switching back and forth is not a blind test, you still know by which way your monitor switch is what the source is.
It's not a major thing. Most cases, it's not that noticeable...but the mix opens up more through the console. And bottom line…even if the two mixes were EXACTLY the same, I would still mix with the console and outboard gear over the ITB approach as I like the touchy-feely aspect of real gear.
A blind test would let you know what only your ears think without the doubt of the outside influences. Be funny if you did do a blind test and ended up choosing the box mix now wouldn't it?
I’m not talking bad about the ITB approach…I’m just telling you what is currently working for me.
I realize that, my point is I took the same position as you, until I actually took the time to do blind testing, and was quite amazed at the results, and how much the outside influences of eyes and knowledge of what source I was hearing influenced what I thought was the better sound. I've since had built a custom monitoring switcher that does not allow me to know which source i am monitoring.
There was a guy in MA recently selling a Trident London console...but first he wanted a bit too much for it, and then he kept killing the listing and then re-listing...just didn't seem kosher. Though last time up he had the price down pretty low for a Trident (I think like $4k)...and it looked real good in the pics.
With something nearby like that...I would go and hear it before buying it.
Fletcher or PAD? PAD usually has a couple of them in various stages of disrepair that are way too high priced. Fletcher's stuff is typically in much better shape, as his staff take the time to restore correctly.
Have you checked out the Toft consoles? They are Trident design and sound really, really great, I mean that analog sound is there, and they are reasonably priced IMHO. The real selling point is they have the sound of a 30 yr old console but not the inevitable maintenance of one, at least for a good 5 yrs before a recapping is required.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1872103 - 01/13/08 04:54 PM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12277
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
When I have some free time, I'll set up a lab style A/B and try it out with a blindfold while someone else is doing the switching.
The thing to consider is…what am I comparing....?
Will it be just the straight/dry DAW stereo sum VS. the same from the console....with NO processing/FX on either, or will it be something else altogether?
See...when I say I like the analog stereo mix better, I'm considering/comparing EVERYTHING...the mix with all the processing/FX.
To try and compare outboard processing/FX to the DAW plug-ins, there is just no way to set them both up at some *equal* reference point, as each plug and outboard device has it's own personality.
To do a real stereo mix comparison of ITB and OTB...you would have to consider each individual plug-in and outboard device that goes into that total "soup".
Just comparing dry, unprocessed mixes from the DAW and the console will only tell one small part of the tale, and not give a real accurate picture of the complete stereo mix differences.
I think the best one can do is set up a complete stereo mix in each, going by what sounds good to your ears for each situation...and then record both of the stereo mixes to the same final format, and then just compare those two final stereo mixes for which sounds better.
When you have dozens of plug-ins and dozens of outboard devices...it's hard to isolate them one by one and set them up "equally" for comparison. There are just too many variables that make that impossible to do.
I can see comparing one plug to one device at a time...but them minute all of them get thrown into the soup...you can't compare them individually anymore.
And yeah...I've checked out the Toft consoles...just in print and online.
I also really like the new Portico line from Rupert Neve. This may be has last new line of gear...I don't know how much longer he will keep going.
It's all nice stuff...but still on the pricey side.
I'll just have to wait until I get my first royalty check from this album I'm finishing up!
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1872959 - 01/15/08 05:38 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Simple. Set a mix ITB and OTB, no fx, dynamics or eq, with levels for each at the same SPL. It will tell all the tale, keeping all the processing trickery out of the equation.
You can use the hardware inserts to mix without the console, I do it all the time. All you need is the converter I/O, which you obviously already have.
I love the sound of a good analog console, but I've found that I also love the sound of a short chain, and simply using the dynamics hardware is really more of that I'm after than the analog summing sometimes. YMMV, but it's certainly worth checking out IMHO. Also, analog components deteriorate slowly over the years, and you might find more s/n through the analog than you had a few years ago. That was one of the big revealing factors for me, the cleanliness of ITB. You can really hear the lack of noise, even with the finest of consoles.
I used a Portico awhile back, and I am a major Neve addict. Honestly I was not impressed. It was very neutral, and IMHO staying ITB would have been as good. It truly lacks what we all love in a Neve, that "sound".
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1873014 - 01/15/08 07:10 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: audiorulez]
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7343
|
|
Offline
|
|
That was one of the big revealing factors for me, the cleanliness of ITB.
I went ITB when I was convinced of the superior accuracy. I use big iron analog consoles all the time live, and like so many others, I love that analog sound. But a BIG factor for me was when I took the noise out of my recordings simply by eliminating the great vintage gear that I had. The stereo spread opens up, the sparkle and clarity returns.
and I have some nice Nevish preamps and analog console pres to get that sound when I want it.
Bill
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1873681 - 01/16/08 05:48 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: Bill@Welcome Home Studios]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
I use big iron analog consoles all the time live, and like so many others, I love that analog sound.
What consoles are you working on? Unless you custom order them, it's rare to find consoles designed for live mixing that actually have input or output transformers anymore.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1873691 - 01/16/08 06:04 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: audiorulez]
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7343
|
|
Offline
|
|
What consoles are you working on? Unless you custom order them, it's rare to find consoles designed for live mixing that actually have input or output transformers anymore.
Sorry that you are not familiar with the term 'big iron' when applied to consoles. Has nothing to do with transformers. It means 'real' consoles, not Mackie, A/H, AudioCentron, etc. Generally speaking, large, heavy consoles. I first ran into the term via Nashville studio types, but it seems to be ubiquitous on the road as well.
Bill
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1873765 - 01/16/08 07:25 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: Bill@Welcome Home Studios]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
Iron typcially refers to transformers when discussing consoles. There are some out there that have x-former mods, but they are rare indeed.
I think the term you are looking for is large format, which categorizes consoles such as the XL4, PM5000, etc.
Speaking of which, one has to wonder if we are the last generation to mix on these incredible desks. Rare is it that a tour carries an analog desk these days. While for some applications I do appreciate the digital desk (theatre especially) there are with few exceptions any of them I would consider "musical". If you spend (on top of the cost of the desk) the big bucks for good converters and a solid clock they can do ok, but IMHO none of them compare to the smoothness of a good analog desk.
In addition, in the emotional heat of a live performance, I just find them too slow to navigate, even the best ones. I want to reach and turn, not select, select, ok where am I, oh yea, select, etc, etc.
I recently did a short monitor run using a PM5D. The convenience factor was great, as everyone was on IEM's, however the impromtu nature of the show really made me work, having to do some seriously quick monitor adjustments that couldn't be programmed given the never know factor.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1873778 - 01/16/08 07:37 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: audiorulez]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12277
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I want to reach and turn, not select, select, ok where am I, oh yea, select, etc, etc.
While I don't have one of the "classic" large format consoles in my humble studio...
...even on my more basic console, that is one of the reasons I still prefer to mix OTB.
It is not always just a question which sounds subjectively better...ITB or OTB...
...but also which way is more comfortable to the user.
Besides liking analog...I use the OTB method because it pleases me to do so.
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1873813 - 01/16/08 08:18 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: miroslav]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
In the studio I don't mind the box, plus we have a controller, so it's not totally mouse driven. The analog console definitely aids in quick adjustments for musician monitoring; it's rare we set up hp monitoring itb when tracking, but we have the ability if we so choose. It does get used occasionally when doing vocals to allow for plugins in the monitor chain if we know a vocalist wants a particular setup of effects in the cans. We've got some templates for recurring clients for this as well we saved.
I don't like to keep the clients waiting either, so the quicker methods to get them comfortable are a big plus IMHO as it pleases those writing the checks who are IMHO the ones to make happy.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1873819 - 01/16/08 08:25 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: miroslav]
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7343
|
|
Offline
|
|
...one of the reasons I still prefer to mix OTB. .....but also which way is more comfortable to the user. Besides liking analog...I use the OTB method because it pleases me to do so.
I don't know why or how, but I made the transition without a hitch. When I pulled the outboard gear from the rig (80 rack spaces of it...) and started using all in the box prcessing, it became a natural progression. When I finally realized that I was mostly using my console as a playback monitor desk, I dumped it in favor of 36 preamps, cleared that large reflective surface off of my desk, got a much smaller desk, and opened up my whole world. I understand how shifting that big desk paradigm is tough for most people. Like Nick, I am uncomfortable with the digital consoles in a live situation. I guess the difference is that in the studio, changes are usually considered, while live there is no time... just make it right.
And I really love automation.... yes it can be incoroprated into mixers in various ways, even though the inserts and time code for boards without automation capabilities. But this is easier ITB.
Bill
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1873831 - 01/16/08 08:41 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: audiorulez]
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7343
|
|
Offline
|
|
...one has to wonder if we are the last generation to mix on these incredible desks. ...
We probably are, though Cadac may hang in there with the theater crowd for a while longer. As soon as bands like the Stones, Fleetwood Mac, etc are gone, you'll probably see the demise of the touring analog console. Ease of use, built in effects, weight and size are all factors driving the digital console market, not to mention the fact that when someone like Mutt Lang gets involved they can hook into Pro Tools and other digital software and run the show without the engineer ever touching the console unless there is a problem. So you may also be witnessing the end of the high-end mixer guy on the road, replaced by systems techs who can troubleshoot technical problems rather than trouping a guy that has good ears and can run a console. As syetms techs have been a part of the scene now for some years, this will enable the tours to lose one more expensive guy, saving not only his salary and per deim, but his travel and hotel expenses, too.
I've used the Digidesign, Digico, and the PM1d and 5d, though I am not by any means particularly proficient on any of them. At least I'm not seeing d8bs or o2rs coming through the door much anymore. Even Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune's sound guy (formerly with Burns Audio, now another aquisition of ProMix) was so embarrased by the o2r crashes that he finally said that he would replace them. (they carried 3 to keep one working, and in two days we went through all three.)
"Iron typcially refers to transformers when discussing consoles. "
You simply travel in different circles with people who use different terminology. I know what I said and I meant to say it. In my world, when discussing transformers one is never discussing consoles, unless we are discussing the power supply of a console.
Bill
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1873936 - 01/16/08 10:56 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: Bill@Welcome Home Studios]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12277
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
What about the new Midas desks...they seem to be high quality analog desks, but with a very small footprint....making them easy to haul for live gigs....?
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1873981 - 01/16/08 11:25 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: miroslav]
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7343
|
|
Offline
|
|
Are you speaking of the Venues, or the earlier 200? In any case, while these boards represent a value, they are not XL-4s. BUT! you can put two channels of XL-4 mic pre and eq in one rack space via the XL-42 mic pre. The Venice? Skip it.
My writing room rack consists of 2 channels of Great River NV, 2 of Midas, 2 of John Hardy, and two racked up Datamix mic pre/eqs. I have 16 channels of Mytek ADC, 8 Mytek DAC, and a Fireface 800. I control it through the Mackie control surface and a Transport, with a custom built calibrated monitor controller using Forssell op amps, to a Cello amp and Dunlavy speakers. I use a RealTraps Room Kit. (And I still need to run the test software in the room.... I checked my last mix in a local studio and it sounded like shit. Which plays into another discussion that we are having elsewhere.... {g})
Bill
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1874005 - 01/16/08 11:58 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: Bill@Welcome Home Studios]
|
audiorulez
Gold Member
Registered: 06/20/07
Posts: 542
|
|
Offline
|
|
[quote=Bill@Welcome Home Studios]Are you speaking of the Venues, or the earlier 200? In any case, while these boards represent a value, they are not XL-4s. /quote]
No they are not XL4's but they have XL3 mic pres. The Venice and Verona are superb sounding consoles, thanks to that. They are IMHO short on what IMHO are inexpensive features, for instance the Venice could easily have all 6 aux switchable pre or post, and I would happily forego one of the +48 indicator lights for a phase reverse. The Verona is big for what it does, and has 8 groups but no VCA's. However they blow away anything in their size and price range (analog or digital) quality wise. I have no complaints doing shows on them if they meet my needs for the given venue and show.
Unfortunately we live in the digital age, and with actually decent sub $15K digital consoles on the market by multiple manufacturers, venues that are upgrading are for the most part going that route, and I can't say I blame them. The new Roland system is particularly good, and dead simple for even the most newbie of engineers to understand. 48 inputs with digital snake for under $12,000 is tough to beat.
AFA the transition to ITB, I am not, and never will be totally there. My tracking chain utilizes the analog console for monitoring (CR and studio) and I rarely use plugins, as I've yet to find one that even comes close to the hardware version. I have invested and/or work in studios that have invested into great converters and desks with "iron" on the front and back ends (IOW for those in the "other circle" transformers). I'm a bit of a junkie for analog gear, and have way too much invested, but having put the time and effort into doing some pretty extensive blind testing, I know what my ears prefer.
I do however love the ability to edit and automate in the box. I still use the console VCA and mute automation occasionally, but less and less as time goes on.
I did a tour a few years back on Big Mick (Huges aka Metallica's FOH) XL4, which has transformers on the front end, and I was in absolute heaven, but what a beast to deal with. Something like 1150lbs in the road case!!!!!! It came with a custom reinforced easy tilt, and still required 6 guys to right the damn thing!!!! But it sounded about as close to perfect as can imagine. I rarely touched the eq save a HP or LP filter.
Now however even Mick is digital, doing the last tour with an XL8, despite it's many, many bugs.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1874008 - 01/16/08 11:59 AM
Re: Using a Mixer and Control Surface
[Re: Bill@Welcome Home Studios]
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12277
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Yeah...I've been tempted to order a few Real Traps from Ethan...as I do have one corner of the room that has more substantial bass buildup than any other part of the room...but, I honestly have not heard it as a problem in my mixes...so far.
I don't find any unusual loss or increase of bass because of it. As soon as I step out of the corner...like 2 feet...the FR sounds very even and smooth.
My problem is and has been...the door, which is in THAT corner. So, hanging bass traps there, just won't work. I was thinking of trying a different approach, and somehow turning the door itself into a bass trap that would effectively suck up that extra bass.....
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: FoxTick, Bunny Knutson
| |
