DonnyThompson, post: 430484, member: 46114 wrote: You can also create unlimited tracks, in both Mono and Stereo ( Hey, Avid... how's that particular feature been going for you? LOL).

:D

I feel like these softwares packages are always a bit behind the curve on some respects, but it's great to see other alternatives developing. I hope samplitude is the last DAW I heave to 'learn' for a while

I wonder how people feel about mixbus vs reaper, both around the same price for a personal license. I like reaper for everything but it's stale looking menu navigation and pluggin selection.

I can only speak for myself - having more experience with MixBus than I do with Reaper - but the mixing GUI on MixBus is pretty attractive, in the sense of it "behaving" like an analog desk, it comes as close as any other platform I've ever used, probably more-so; which isn't any great surprise, really... considering that this platform was designed and developed by one of the most popular high-end mixing console manufacturers in recording history, and that their original intent was to provide that same design in a digital production version.

The times I have used it, I've liked the results. As mentioned previously, it's not what I would consider to be a "transparent" platform. There is a definite "analog vibe" to it. And, while I probably wouldn't recommend it to someone who is used to doing modern production with Avid ( or Samplitude, either) it does have its own thing going on; there is a "character" there. Now, whether or not that character is pleasing to the user or not, depends on what they like to hear and what they want to do.
For someone who perhaps came up with analog, and is looking to get into an easy to use digital reproduction of it - that is still reminiscent of the analog sound - it would be a good choice.

And at $40, it's not like you'd be losing a lot of money if you decided that you didn't like it.

I can say this... when I go to use MixBus, I do so because I'm after a certain sound, and there is that expectation to it... as opposed to the smearing that I used to get when I used Sonar, which was supposed to be "transparent" but actually was not.
There's the difference right there, I suppose. With MixBus. you know what you're going to get - which is exactly why you'd want to use it - as opposed to using a platform that is supposed to be transparent, and is not.

IMHO of course.

DonnyThompson, post: 430487, member: 46114 wrote: I can only speak for myself - having more experience with MixBus than I do with Reaper - but the mixing GUI on MixBus is pretty attractive, in the sense of it "behaving" like an analog desk, it comes as close as any other platform I've ever used, probably more-so; which isn't any great surprise, really... considering that this platform was designed and developed by one of the most popular high-end mixing console manufacturers in recording history, and that their original intent was to provide that same design in a digital production version.

The times I have used it, I've liked the results. As mentioned previously, it's not what I would consider to be a "transparent" platform. There is a definite "analog vibe" to it. And, while I probably wouldn't recommend it to someone who is used to doing modern production with Avid ( or Samplitude, either) it does have its own thing going on; there is a "character" there. Now, whether or not that character is pleasing to the user or not, depends on what they like to hear and what they want to do.
For someone who perhaps came up with analog, and is looking to get into an easy to use digital reproduction of it - that is still reminiscent of the analog sound - it would be a good choice.

And at $40, it's not like you'd be losing a lot of money if you decided that you didn't like it.

I can say this... when I go to use MixBus, I do so because I'm after a certain sound, and there is that expectation to it... as opposed to the smearing that I used to get when I used Sonar, which was supposed to be "transparent" but actually was not.
There's the difference right there, I suppose. With MixBus. you know what you're going to get - which is exactly why you'd want to use it - as opposed to using a platform that is supposed to be transparent, and is not.

IMHO of course.

You might be on to somethin D. With character plug-insmaybe character daw is next. Like ampex vs studer or what have you. Interesting.

DonnyThompson, post: 430484, member: 46114 wrote: Similar to working on a Harrison desk, with "knob-per-fuction" features...

Now that's something I didn't spot in the email I got from Harrison describing this new release.

DonnyThompson, post: 430484, member: 46114 wrote: The mixer section also includes the dynamics controls per channel that made Harrison a very popular console choice throughout the 70's and 80's. Along with tape saturation ( emulated) on the buses and Master Bus, the sonic signature to this platform is very warm and reminiscent of "that" sound that so many are searching for. If transparency is what you are after, you'd probably be better off with another DAW, but for those who like that smooth analog "smear", this is your ticket.

This "warm effect" is something that is much toted about Mixbus, but having used V2 for about a year now, I don't hear it that way, with the exception of the saturation effects when you push things hard. Having done trials of mixes using both Mixbus and Samplitude, I can indeed hear some differences between the results, but not to the extent I could identify with any certainty which mix came out of which DAW.

DonnyThompson, post: 430484, member: 46114 wrote: Industry standard audio I/O support: Mixbus uses ASIO/Directsound on Windows, CoreAudio on OSX, and JACK on Linux.

I read that for this release they have coded round the need for JACK.