Thread: Why I think analog summing is bunk.

Chris....I hear this too. Its almost like theres a bit of ground loop somewhere in the system and I've been known to unhook the entire studio and test every cable searching for it never to really solve it.

For anyone who has or does work in an office are with a lot of flourescent lighting, especially older flourescents without solid-state ballasts, you are being subjected to a low 58 cycle hum at all times. Its a Bflat in case you're interested. The reason its not 60 cycles like the power grid operates at is because of the ballasting.

Okay, so I see what you're up to with this.

Perhaps something along the lines of a Manley Passive at the gateway to the 2 buss will add enough of its own set of harmonics to filter out this thing. Big tubes, big iron, nothing gets out without it becoming what is dictated by the circuit itself.

Some history for all you.

This video is where I was 30 years ago. I spent a lot of money on digital and learned a lot about sound designing and how to make sound. I followed Quincy Jones and the high end engineers who were using the secrets to creating pop music. I made a good living using it to my advantage but now see how it is effecting the entire world of music to a point that I don't want it anymore. If you listen closely, you may be able to hear the same un natural line in these old samples as you do in the music made today. I hear it.



This is one of the first DAW's I owned. This is an 8 voice, 8 bit sampler, and thanks to Christopher Stone ( HEAR his new creation http://vimeo.com/14221577 ) for his dedication to the library:



And Yes... It is all related to the DAW you are using today. This was 15 years pre Pro Tools.

Chris, I don't know whether you had considered working this way, but the highest quality mixes I achieve are analogue mix-downs of high sample rate (96KHz) digital tracks, the 2-bus mix being captured at the project target rate of 44.1KHz or 48KHz. This is easy to set up sourcing from a bank of HD24XRs, but to get this to work using a DAW, you would have to have a separate 2-track capture computer or else an S/PDIF digital recorder after your 2-track ADC.

I can really hear the difference even at the 16-bit 2-track (CD quality) level through having let my analogue mixes "breathe" by sourcing them with 96KHz converted digital. No more 44.1KHz "tizz" that you mention amplified by the number of tracks.

Thanks Boswell, I remember you mentioning this some time back. I have the second DAW fitted with the Dangerous Master and Lavry Blacks.

When you say "analogue mix-downs of high sample rate (96KHz) digital tracks, the 2-bus mix being captured at the project target rate of 44.1KHz or 48KHz."
Are these your analogue tracks are what are you sending them to for analogue summing? Can you explain your DAW to Analog rig?

The setup I was outlining was for tracks recorded at 96KHz on (multiple) HD24XR hard disk recorder(s). No computer or DAW involved during the recording process. For mixdown in those cases, I took the analogue outputs of the HD24XRs (12 per unit) into the line inputs of whatever analogue mixer was specified for the contract (Midas, A+H etc) and then the 2-track mix was digitized at 44.1KHz for CD on (say) an FF800 and captured on a PC.

It's not quite the same as your proposed analogue summer, as my mix process was using a conventional analogue mixer with all the usual outboard effects available. What I wanted to get across was the difference between sourcing at 96KHz and sourcing at 44.1KHz, even for a CD mix. I've heard many engineers say that if the product is a 44.1KHz CD, why record at a higher rate as no-one can hear the difference, and it just makes trouble when doing the sample-rate conversion (SRC). Maybe it is the SRC that makes the difference, but for me, the 96KHz source tracks were golden and mixed well without ear strain. If you have 2-track analogue audio that sounds good, however it is derived, digitizing it at 44.1KHz does not automatically impair the sound.

Of course, what I was comparing was a 96KHz recording mixed in analogue to a 44.1KHz 2-track recorder and a 44.1KHz recording mixed digitally to 44.1KHz 2-track. Neither of these two methods uses digital SRC, and what I have not done recently is the comparison with 96KHz recordings mixed digitally at 96KHz and then digital SRC down to 44.1KHz. I don't have a quality SRC that I would trust for that comparison.

With your setup, you may be able to experiment with 96KHz recordings output from one DAW system, mixed on your Dangerous Master and re-captured at 44.1KHz via the Lavry Blacks hooked up to a separate computer.

I have to say that 96KHz recording is the exception rather than the norm for me, as it gobbles disk space and the project budget does not usually justify it. For some of the big names, I will go 96KHz anyway even though it's not specified, just for my own satisfaction.

On a somewhat related matter....

Boswell and others, do you store your projects indefinitely? Or do you rotate them out like taxes (7 year or 10 year archive)? I ask because projects made just after I left the Corps 10 years ago took little space because I didn't have resources to have the studio/equipment I desired. Now that I'm nearly there, project storage is becoming something to plan for. Currently I just keep it all on Glyph cartridges but that isn't the most inexpensive way-just the safest most easily accessible way for me.

Thanks Bos for that detail.
I am confused over.. aren't HD24XR digital, all digital? I'm confused how you are getting analogue in your mix? You say the outputs of the HD24XR are analogue? If so, no wonder you guys like this but I'm thinking these units are HD recorders.

John,

I have 25 years of archived songs on 5 1/4 floppys, DAT, Zips, cassette data backup, CD, and old HD's all in closets. Most of it is just a memory in my mind because 3 quarters of it all are on formats I will never get running again.

I've tried to take the best with me as I advanced in my music career but times goes by and I've accepted the majority to be dust. I've been saving my old Pro Tools TDM but how long will it last too. Its a big problem.

I'm basically starting over.
All the digital stuff I have is just plain ugly. The analog stuff I had is on old Ampeg, long gone. Some old cassettes are the only memory there and even those they are at 65 db, stretched, wowy and noisy, but they have more warmth than all the digital stuff I did from 1998 to 2005. Its what got me into this whole hybrid thing. After listening to old recordings in my analog days... hmm, I'm convinced

The HD24XR has analog input and output. I think what Boswell is saying is that because you are sending each individual channel back out analog from the HD24-no summing yet-into a mixer or in your case a summing mixer, you avoid the zzzzz sound you hear because there is no down conversion and no bit rate conversion. Then the output of the summing mixer is sent to your high end converters to digitize the summed mix at target format. This is more or less what you're shooting for anyway with your Mixdream and Dangerous 2 Bus. Something like the Korg MR-1000 would be perfect for a master recorder in this application and a reason I've been wanting one. You get your space and you get your format conversion without the sizzle.

Incidentally I'd been thinking that the sizzle I hear was some combination of distortion from the speakers or headphones and my tinnitus but maybe not.