welcome to hybrid heaven. I'm using a summing box (MixDream) and hardware. I don't have any hands on experience with the gear you mention. Big headroom matters.

The reason we choose hybrid is for the open clean ( grit or silk) sound and big ass bass, yes? :)
Bass needs headroom so keep that in mind.

# 3 sounds the best to me but again, don't go by that just yet. The X Desk looks great too.

The more I mix hybrid the more I want hardware EQ's but not necessarily for each track in the analog stage. I love ITB control. I am a believer that we don't need a lot of hardware but just the right amount seems to be my flavour. This keeps the noise low and the sweet silk in good perspective if you follow me. If I was using a console, it would have to be on serious desk . This is why i choose the summing box instead.

I'm liking getting the tracks sounding as good as possible ITB then stemming them out in groups. I add analog flavour and processing on the bus stems via inserts on the summing amps. It helps glue those groups together to create a nice package. Seems easy to get it all right where you want it.

This way you still have all the control and beauty of digital automation and processing while utilizing specialized hardware for the flour of choice. Modular is the way I go.

Nice to have you with us. I'm hoping we turn RO into our hybrid haven this next year. Pass it on!

Another thing to keep in mind is your monitoring and the X Desk has that covered in a tolerable way. Not sure how good it is but thats a big part of this next step for you.
If I recall, Apogee just announced a new product with what appears to be an excellent monitoring section added to their converters. I'll look for it here:

Couldn't find it. I must be thinking about something else.

Hey audiokid thanks for the warm welcome and feedback. Yes it's an exciting move for me and one that I know will significantly improve my mixes both as they sound and as my personal enjoyment of them. It's just about making the right choices now. My plan is exactly as you mentioned, to create stems as I go in logic mixed out on buses to my 16 channels to which ever summing / mixer box I decide to buy. This way I'll have better separation as I mix. I like the way that with the ZR16 I can then add extra EQ in the analog domain. In the long run I will expand my hardwear set up which is limited at the moment. Both the ZR16 and X-Desk have good monitoring options. I also like them both as I can use them as a speaker controller / volume control / talkback to replace my Mackie big knob at the centre of my desk set up.
Of-course, on paper option 3 looks the best as it mentions 3 superb brands with UA Apogee, SSL and UA but looking at it in depth will I really hear an improvement in sound quality from option one with the ZR16 and a separate UA Quad dsp card? There's a £2000 price gap between the two which I can put towards a superb stereo compressor and that is a very inviting thought indeed. I would love to hear what anybody here thought about that specific query.

To be aware of, right or wrong:

There is a huge percentage of people under the age of 20 years old posting misinformation on forums all in the name to gather support for their purchases and current methods. This is a big problem and something we have done extremely well filtering out on recording.org. The clear winner however is China. facepalm

FWIW I pass on an my opinion too as I attempt to keep it as condensed as possible (a work in progress):

A member in a similar discussion recently described his mixes as less quality after using his beloved console for years. He calls it a hybrid summing system too.
If you notice though, he has been following users and gear recommendations from people who go about OTB summing in a similar way. And if you follow those members you will often see they dropped their lust for mixing OTB. Is there a common denominator?

Like the majority, he described his process and was shocked to learn even his ITB mix sounded no different bypassing his console all together. " He now shouts ITB is better " and joins yet another statistic against OTB summing. He has been investing in hardware that is now a deemed a complete waste of money all these years. He is selling off his dated gear on ebay except for a few API EQ's and favorite preamps.

When I reluctantly questioned his set-up on how he used his console for summing, it was so obvious where he went wrong. He was using the console for individual I/O going AD>DA>AD>DA>AD including mastering back to the same session followed by a SRC for CD.
Other than this being console fun ( I do hate a mouse too) its a complete waste of time because his converters are less than adequate for the task. But, majority exclaim converters are all comparable these days so we have yet another tool in question and debate where this is true and not so true.

Being said, even if they were stellar enough, I still would NOT mix that way so we move on to my point.

You will predictably read common comments from people using a Lynx Aurora 16 in a "hybrid" set-up that jump ship. These are the most common shilled converters for a hybrid set-up and the most common people who jump ship. Aurora 16's are considered the best deal by people that claim to know what they are talking about.

Most converters work fine for AD but not high end enough for multiple AD/DA not to mention going even further into sonic quagmire when using most consoles for a patch-bay (I say most because nothing is set in stone). Engineers will eventually check their mixes ITB to find they have been mixing mud and wasting money for years. Thus, blame it entirely on what they consider "hybrid" snake oil.
The misinformation goes on... facepalm giving boutique hardware products less meaning to exists in the DAW world.

From a selfish perspective I want to remain quiet $$$... but this also scares me because I don't want to see boutique manufacturers go down and the level of quality suffer. Should I want to buy something new down the road, it will either be unavailable or made in China and not even the same quality.
I feel the pain for our high end industry so I share opinions like mine to do my part in the name of preserving sonic heaven/ Pro Audio and to also help the odd person with insight so they avoid some of the common mistakes before they get started. A win win for everyone.

Yes, I'm a broken record. China and high end sound are in conflict and its a big problem.
Most of us are feeling a financial impact, we can't afford high end as we'd like, however, we can still do it smartly using what we can afford to produce the best results. I'm guessing a lot of consoles would be pretty awesome as long as we aren't using them this way.

64bit plug-ins , ya right, I'm still waiting to be impressed. Sonar is cool at 64bit but its still a DAW with plug-ins and if you are wanting more in sound, its why you are searching for answers and here..

So, once your mix is OTB I say, stay there until you are ready for final destination. Do not ADDA back and forth in the same session like the people who missed the memo. I don't care if it is a $500.000 Neve or you have a 64bit DAW with 32bit floating and stellar converters. A few times back and forth and it all starts to sound the same. I hear no point going back and forth. I think ITB is the best up to a point and once you have it ready for final destination and gear to support stems into a high headroom summing system, Juice It UP OTB, finalize your analog mix and save (master) to a second recorder of some kind to AVOID SRC like the uninformed above.
That's how you take full advantage of the analog domain. I don't recommend returning your mix to the same DAW session like most people do unless you are possibly staying at the same sample rate. But even then, if you want to take the additions step, a second DAW and some fine mastering gear is the icing on the cake.

To summarize:
If you are using a console like a extended patchbay or channel strip and doing the ADDA>ADDA>AD dance, I think you will be disappointed sooner or later and join the "been there done that" crowd.

If you are using the console's pres and eq's going in, this is another topic. If you are using it as a an extention to a hybrid summing rig, I'd avoid SRC like the plague.

That's my best advise.

Cheers!

Thanks for the detailed words and of course the warnings. The reason I am investing in this upgrade is simple. I have recently taken some of my projects to a hybrid set up studio for a new mix (SSL converters and a TLA m4 desk with a few choice hardwear compressors) and the results were stunning. My tracks we're already well mixed to the best of my ability, but after being output through this system and tweaked a little everything gained more space and definition. This is what I crave - an extra step up in being able to place my frequencies and to be able to add on other hardwear that I get in the analog domain. I have no plans to go back and forth with my signals as you explained and I head the warning about converting in the same project thank you.

The main query I still have in my set up options is: Are the D/A converters in the Zed R16 up to task. I'm still investigating this but I may just have to find a way to test for myself but it's difficult given the range of products in my options.

Thanks again.

audiokid, post: 394314 wrote: :)
Bass needs headroom so keep that in mind.

Please explain this to me, audiokid.

Cheers :)

This is a big topic and rudimentary. Keeping levels ITB at the max of -18dBFS is the obvious. Summing+processing needs headroom to make mojo tonic. Bass is a big part of this.
I'm not a technical guru, maybe someone would like to elaborate on analog mojo?

I'm a musician first and foremost so everything I do is about what I hear so I follow my ears. You are asking the wrong guy if you are looking for technical stuff. However, I'll add a bit to get this started.

Common sense = "Analog Headroom" including greater power supply promise loads of headroom. What goes around, comes around so:
Doing searches on headroom gives you tons of information on the benefits. I always pick up something more. Thus, why I keep investing in analog mojo.smoke
The importance for HPF, harmonics and interesting information about phase as well. Check it out.

If you use a lot of outboard hardware including synths, a high headroom summing unit makes even more sense.
If you like clear fat bass that is snappy it sounds better to me if the summing amp, or any amp for that matter is built for it.
High headroom in your gain staging equals better sound, more transparent distortion-free mix to my ears. And its fun.
Bass consumes a big part of my mix so its important for me to invest in products that allow the gain to pass to and from without bottleneck ( like trying to cram a ball through a straw).

I found this interesting:

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

The Dangerous uses a pair of BurrBrown OPA134 opamps as a sum amp. Those will output about 13.7 volts with a 15 volt supply. If you want a bit more headroom, replace those with the BB OPA211. It's a super low noise opamp, very clear using silicon/germainium technology and is rail to rail outputs. It will do 15 volts out on a 15 volt supply. It also sounds WAY better.

The balanced outputs use DRV134 driver IC's. Replace those with that 16xx series for better THD specs and sound.

I wonder what SPL uses in the MixDream, anyone know? I love this box. Check out the NEOS. I'm told the bass is amazing .

FWIW, other than the importance of DAC headroom going to and from the box, please keep the ITB vs OTB summing debate ( war) out of this topic. Although the DAW is the final destination, digital headroom is a different topic all together and one most people already sold on mixing OTB, aren't interested in debating :).

Mo Facta, do you think analog headroom is important for bass? Why do you ask? Any additional comments?

I just want to clarify that I understand what headroom is. What I want to understand is why you have come to the conclusion that bigger bass needs more of it.

Headroom, in it's simplest terms, is merely how many dB there are from +4dBu/0VU - the nominal range - to clip point. The reason why high headroom devices have been known to sound better is because they can deliver a cleaner signal with less distortion at higher levels, such as during peaks in the audio program (at the +4dBu standard). They also deliver a better RMS response and don't saturate (and therefore introduce harmonic distortion) as easily during nominal operation. Modern equipment that, say, clips at +18dBu will start to exhibit saturation distortion several dB below clip point while operating at the +4dBu standard, which essentially shrinks your headroom, despite the unit's specs on paper. That, combined with increasingly lower quality analog components, is, in my opinion, the biggest source of brittle, harsh sound that we are all trying to combat in this digital world we live in. This is also why it has been suggested that, because of the rise of these increasingly lower headroom devices with low quality components, it would probably be a better choice to operate at the -10dBv standard, thus adding a further 12dB [or so] buffer to combat this nasty saturation distortion from creeping in.

Saturation distortion isn't always a band thing, however, as it is well known that some devices sound good when they saturate. Some do not. It all depends on the quality of the components, and, in my opinion, not the headroom available. There are converters that are calibrated to +20dBu and are used for clipping in mastering (fed from higher headroom devices) that sound great (by modern standards) when used this way because their front end components can accommodate much more, depending on their calibration.

Going back to bass, the level and "size" of the bass is relative to the mix - it's level is equally so - so is therefore independent of headroom. The concept of headroom is a peak level arena. Granted, if you're running your bass hot in a high headroom device, you are less likely to saturate the channel and therefore will get a cleaner signal, which may help in giving the impression of bigger bass. However I think that there are other more influential factors that determine how big the bass sounds and they are myriad and varied, not least of which being the source and it's consistency. Finding the right balance and arrangement is another. Put another way, I do not think that headroom has a huge effect on the relative "size" of the bass in relation to the mix, apart from the saturation aspect that I mentioned above.

Cheers :)

I found this by Bob Katz:

Bob Katz wrote: Deciding On an In-House Analog (voltage) Level
Just use the level provided by your console manufacturer, right? Well, maybe not. +4 dBv (reference .775 volts) may be a bad choice of reference level. Let's examine some factors you may not have considered when deciding on an in-house standard analog (voltage) level. When was the last time you checked the clipping point of your console and outboard gear? Before the advent of inexpensive 8-bus consoles, most professional consoles' clipping points were +24 dBv or higher. A frequent compromise in low-priced console design is to use internal circuits that clip around +20 dBv (7.75 volts). This can be a big impediment to clean audio, especially when cascading stages (how many of those amplifiers are between your source and your multitrack?). In my opinion, to avoid the "solid state edginess" that plagues a lot of modern equipment, the minimum clip level of every amplifier in your system should be 6 dB above the potential peak level of the music. The reason: Many opamps and other solid state circuits exhibit an extreme distortion increase long before they reach the actual clipping point. This means at least +30 dBv (24.5 volts RMS) if 0 VU is+4 dBv.

Cheers :)

Aren't we talking about hardware though? Tranny's, Op amps, wire, power supply and how all that translates OTB via a summing system and the hardware we use at the end of the day.. Thats what I'm referring to more than the mixing end.

I am absolutely talking about hardware.

Cheers :)

I hear ya but don't follow 100%.

Mackie vs API console and sound difference?

You stated that you found that higher headroom devices supply a bigger bass sound, since your mixes are bass-orientated.

I asked you why you thought that.

I then went on to give my take on headroom and its relation to "better sound".

My attempt was to clarify headroom and why we consider it to have better sound and to challenge your assertion that headroom provides a better bass sound.

Cheers :)

Gottcha. Thanks.

Lets keep this at my musician level as I will replay it in my own words. LOL This is for the simple minds.

I simply think more headroom allows more room to play in the analog domain. It allows me to push gains more freely, to get that distortion or mojo without moving faders ITB too. And what we put in between the summing box makes life fun. So, I guess what you are saying is a 4" speaker still sounds great if the mix is right?

Sort of.

I'm simply trying to give some clarity on why higher headroom devices sound better.

Cheers :)

hehe, I love ya man! You bring the level up around here. thumb I often start debates and leave it up to all of you to take it to a higher level of understanding or explanation. I guess this is one of those.

I see music in colour and space, often as pictures too. Life and sound is one big colour spectrum to me. Trying to explain music and sound has never been easy from a technical POV. Ironically I run this place. WTF is that all about. Strange how that happened (don't ask). :)
I think musicians that are able to compose and engineer, who crossover into engineering are somewhat technically impaired per-say and can have their own way of explaining what they hear. The technical info you posted is missing the sole to me.

What I hear you saying about headroom: A glass of milk is still a glass of milk whether its 8oz or a litre. If you add sugar, in order for it to not over flow, you need to make room. If you want hot milk but you boil it, it will overflow. So in order for it to not boil over, you need to watch the temperature. Maybe even allow for some extra headroom in order for it to not boil over and make a mess, if you like milk really hot milk that is.
Or hot cream with syrup! hmm.
But maybe just get a big enough pot in the first place.

Bass equal's cream? maybe...

Just another way of saying the same thing.
When mixing, the less I have to struggle, the more fun and better results I get. Mass headroom allows me to free up my mind so I'm sure there are more than one reason why this all works.

I'm looking for the information I read years ago on phase related issues in relation to headroom, opamps and bass. It was really interesting. I found it when researching Dangerous summing a few years back. Have you read up on this? It was in relation to Neve phase shifting but not the post at GS forum. It may have been something Eric Sarafan said on the Womb, maybe the recpit. hmm .

Its an additional reason why I decided to invest in a summing amp over a console and why I ended up using the MixDream over the 2-Bus or other comparative box's. My memory is terrible when it comes to repeating word for word. You asked.

I wish manufacturers would publish this kind of information but I also know why they don't.

On a side note: I'm adding a Folcrom to my MixDream. Has anyone thought about this? MixDream has direct outs that could be useful in a parallel setup or as an additional API or Neve flavour MixDream combo. Cool for drums and bass.

Kurt, you there? You noticed the NEOS. 120v rails and faders. Think you would like that? If so, I'd love to hear more about that and your approach.

Yes there is a certain amount of crosstalk and phase shift, albeit very little, and this is where some have attributed the sonic signature of the given summing amp.

To me that's a flavor thing, though, and is not related to headroom.

Cheers :)

I look forward to exploring the new world of analog and headroom. So I finally made up my mind on my equipment which was not even on my initial list. I have decided to up the budget and get the Shadow Hills Equinox as my summing device and an SSL Alphalink system for my converters. I'm real excited to finish the new studio build and get this gear working. I feel the extra channels of summing will really benefit me and the Equinox does the monitor control I needed, has two awesome pre amps and has some very tasty tone control through the transistor choices. I will update once I've put it all to the test. Thanks for the replies.

That sounds like a great system! I'm really excited to hear how you like this and I look forward to sharing notes.

Cheers!

±120V technology headroom

I found an interesting article at SOS relating to the Op Amp and phasing issues comment I made a few posts back. I'm glad other people posted information on this before I dropped a bunch of cash prior to investing in a hybrid rig. I think its an important area to comment on so for what its worth:

Got to love SPL gear, especially their ±120V technology. I cannot imagine what this is like.
I own the SPL Passeq ( a pultec concept) with +/- 60V rails and its unreal. I put it at the end of my chain, just before the Crane Song STC-8 heading out to the second DAW for finalizing. The MixDream and Dangerous Master are loaded up with hardware and it all ends up in the Passeq. Its to die for. The summing system doesn't flinch. I can hard bypass each and every piece going in or bypass the total mix at any stage. Their "No Mix" feature is the best. Especially if you are tracking back to the same DAW and want to avoid feedback loops.
And the Dangerous Master is the icing on the cake. Headroom to spare. Nothing ever sweats with this system.

With passive filtering comes an unavoidable drop in signal level that requires makeup amplification, and with the Passeq, here SPL’s extraordinary Supra-OPs, with their unique analog 120-volt technology, come into play. With a 116 dB signal-to-noise ratio and +34dB of headroom, the SUPRA-OPs offer a stunning 150dB dynamic range, placing them in an unsurpassed leadership position in either analog or digital signal processing. The tremendously fast SUPRA slew rate of 200V/ms allows for a highest possible precision in filter output signals, particularly in the all-important arena of transient response. These amplifiers effortlessly and without coloration or degradation, transmit all the desired filter characteristics and sonic results an engineer has sought out and in the process, pushing beyond the limits of what has been technically possible to now.

The MixDream has ±60V and I have never clipped it. It has a Lundahl tranny option but I usually bypass it. I swear I hear the bass "less tight" when its on. Why I commented on no transformers in the signal path to introduce distortion or phase shifts, or limit the bandwidth. Based on hands on experience, I trust this information below to be true.
Using a DAW and knowing how big a sound you can get (BASS) ITB, this was extremely important to me. So, another reason why hybrid amps like these are pretty damn cool. Headroom is important to me and the tighter the bass the better I like it. I use synth bass' all the time and anyone that has knows how HUGE they are. Its extremely important that this is never compromised OTB.

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.soundons…"]Product Review - SPL Neos[/]="http://www.soundons…"]Product Review - SPL Neos[/]

To put the significance of the ±60V supply rails into context, most modern solid-state audio equipment runs off either ±15V or ±18V power rails, while a lot of early classic equipment — including Neve’s consoles — ran off single-sided 24V supplies. The greater the supply voltage, the more headroom available, so the primary benefit of SPL’s ‘120V’ approach is that it potentially provides 12dB more internal headroom than a typical ±15V system, and 10dB more than a ±18V one. However, the advantages go wider than that, because only discrete component bespoke op-amp circuitry can operate on these higher power rails, and that brings with it impressively low harmonic and transient distortion figures, a 200kHz bandwidth and particularly fast slew rates. All of the Neos I/O employs active electronics — there are no transformers in the signal path to introduce distortion or phase shifts, or limit the bandwidth.

Funnily enough, I have a colleague who was considering the Alphalink converters. When we did some research on it we came across some information that the Alphalinks use the exact same converter chip as the M-Audio Profire 2626 and the Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56. The front end utilizes JRC 4565 opamps, which is found in a lot of prosumer gear.

In my opinion, they are not great converters and do not stack up to other high end designs that use upgraded opamps (like burr browns) and better caps, etc. The converter chip itself is good (which is usually the case) but this means nothing when coupled to inferior analog parts.

To me, these converters are riding on the SSL name. If you're going to spend that money I would recommend the Lynx Aurora converters.

Cheers :)

it will be interesting to see how it all comes out in a year or two and if the expense of a "hybrid" system is really worth it.

64 bit daws reportedly are much better at summing than 32 bit counterparts. this whole move to out of the box summing just may be a huge waste, skools still out on this one.

anecdotally i would add, even summing a 32 bit system with a cheapo mackie mixer makes a very noticeable improvement. I have experienced this for myself. it's not difficult to improve the summing in analog in comparison to 32 itb bit summing.

but for my money i would tend to pay attention to what Russ Long has had to say about it in the recent past which was he expects (as do i) that there will be a lot of summing solutions for sale on the cheap on E Bay and CraigsList in the next year
or so.

i know audiokid and i do not agree on this point. like i said it will be interesting to see how it all pans out. i could be wrong.

mmph! gaah!suicide ahhh!

Hey Kurt, I actually agree with everything you mentioned. In fact, I think Sequoia 12 is already there. Its incredible! I don't sum OTB for the summing per-say, I do it for the variation and what that brings to a mix. It's variation that makes it appealing. It's about sound design and combining iron.

So once I got that understood, it was just a matter of choosing the right system.

Sent from my iPhone

To add, we all have our reasons or justifications I suppose. But for me, even though I mention headroom, I talk about that because I want my summing amp able and ready for addition hardware, hardware that I use for a specific reason on a particular stem.
I want the summing amp with the least amount of colour and for it to be the closest thing to a straight wire.

I think people buying into a "coloured" summing amp or console are missing the ball, but not if they want that sound so.
But if you are doing this as a mixing or mastering business, I ask myself why I would want something colouring every song the same way. And that includes a Neve like or API console ( but I wouldn't throw one out if someone gave it to me!) . But realistically a console is not for me. To noisy and big compared to hybrid. And I love my DAW but I know it sounds much more interesting when I mix digital and analog up.

The combination of the two is the dope. Different microphones in a mix, different pres and different summing glue persay. . More variation makes an interesting mix.

Anyway, I'm not thinking for a moment that an analog summing amp is competing with digital headroom. Its never been a battle of headroom or ITB vs OTB summing to me. So many people think this is what its all about and they get stuck on that, they are way off.
The better the DAW gets, the better hybrid gets. Plain and simple. Gear isn't going away, the affordability and knowledge is.

I predict there will be continued advancements in the analog domain that will do that little extra no matter how incredible the DAW gets. Hybrid is about variation and tricks of the trade. Digital is incredibly cool, hybrid is cooler.

Enjoy this:

Kurt Foster, post: 394684 wrote: it will be interesting to see how it all comes out in a year or two and if the expense of a "hybrid" system is really worth it.

64 bit daws reportedly are much better at summing than 32 bit counterparts. this whole move to out of the box summing just may be a huge waste, skools still out on this one.

anecdotally i would add, even summing a 32 bit system with a cheapo mackie mixer makes a very noticable improvement. I have experienced this for myself. it's not difficult to improve the summing in analog in comparison to 32 itb bit summing.

but for my money i would tend to pay attention to what Russ Long has had to say about it in the recent past which was he expects (as do i) that there will be a lot of summing solutions for sale on the cheap on E Bay and CraigsList in the next year
or so.

i know audiokid and i do not agree on this point. like i said it will be interesting to see how it all pans out. i could be wrong.

mmph! gaah!suicide ahhh!

I don't think bit depth is the main issue here when it comes to summing. Digital summing, even in a 32-bit FP environment, is TECHNICALLY perfect. Whether or not a difference can be heard is as difficult to prove as whether summing in the analog domain can be heard. The handicap is identical in both domains because both are subjective to the listener and his psyche at the time (in my opinion).

I know Kenny Gioia has said that when he's working OTB it FEELS better to him but when he does an identical mix ITB, it's hard to justify to himself - when he listens to the mix in his car - that the analog mix is better. The margin of what we think is a vast improvement just doesn't translate to the end listener. Call that lack of music appreciation or sonic appreciation or whatever, and blame it on the times, I guess.

Summing in the analog domain has always been an aesthetic option. It also opens us the possibility to use outboard gear without latency. That's big one. I personally feel better about my mixes when they're summing in the analog domain and I haven't done extensive A/B comparisons but there have been some projects where I've summed some songs in the analog domain and some ITB. They both sounded good to me, but they definitely had different sonic aesthetics. One thing I've noticed with analog summing is most definitely that transients, particularly on drums, get preserved a bit better. At least to my ears.

All this is opinion, of course, because a competent mix can be achieved in both domains and it depends on who you are and what you are used to.

Once again, there's NO SILVER BULLET for any audio application and that includes summing.

CHeers :)

Not only are compressors and eq's nice in a hybrid rig but effect processors too. And in the new world of hybrid studios, where vocal booths are becoming a really essential part IMO, processors go hand in hand. Yes, this is more than cool and no, you don't need a traditional room perfectly built for vocals if you have one of these beasts, they will get you by indeed.
DAW's aren't the only thing changing the way we record. Improvements on acoustic treatment are changing the way we do things too. Thus, the sound of a lot of pop vocals today.

Example: I have a Bricasti M7 and there isn't a reverb on the planet that can touch this ITB. I'm told it would take 7 Computers to do what this does right now as a plug-in, if possible.
True or not, that number sounds a bit far fetched however, no matter how powerful the computer gets, there will always be something like a Bricasti built as a dedicated hardware miles ahead of the available plug-in.

Strapping the Bricasti on the 2-bus creates the most glorious room simulators I've ever heard. Its incredibly real and beyond. A dry vocal track made awesome.

I'm now planning on adding an Eventide H8000FW. Check those out.

As Mo Facta points out, no latency mixing and processing is pretty sweet.
So, the summing amp serves more than what people may think. smoke

What really makes you guys think that this particular " clean, transparent " summing network is any better than the ones you find in Neve, API consoles? They are talking about additional electronics. What additional electronics going into the summing network? A volume control? That's a straight wire. That isn't electronics. Volume controls don't degrade your sound. Dirty ones when you try to move them about, will. But we're not talking about dirty ones are we? No.

While they announced that they are completely transformer less, that's the same crap I heard back in the late 1970s. And that really only came about because of cost. Better is only better if you think it's better. An electric guitar is far better than any violin. Why? Because it can play louder and that's the only reason. But it can't do that by itself. So it's different, as opposed to better. You can put down Transformers all you want. All you are talking about is more sound of shattered glass which you deem better. Anything that invokes a color is alive. Your car won't go any faster with white paint on it then it would with blue paint on it. It would not be better it would only be different. Different skewed in the way that you like perhaps and colored in a transparent and clear manner. So it can take +27 DB without overloading its input? Big deal. Neve & API have been doing that for years. Nothing new there. I can go right into the summing amplifiers of my Neve, straight from a patch cord. Even better when you stick in a resistor network for summing. So do you want a grand piano without a sound board and instead electronic pickups? So ya get no coloration from someone's wood. After all that spoils the sound of the piano. This is all ridiculous nonsense. It's marketing hype and nothing more. Fine console summing amplifiers are capable of doing everything this thing does and even more. I'm sure you need to push these pieces since they are sponsors of yours? And it's convenient in your hybrid studio. Certainly not a necessity. Nobody wants to stop with the constant nonsense if you've got a fine console already, you certainly don't need one of these. If you're in that bedroom control room with your lunchbox, yeah maybe? And that's what it's really only designed for. All that transparent blah blah is just that. They don't know what else to say when they are competing against companies like Neve, SSL, API, Trident, et al. of all the good boards out there. Oh boy direct coupled without any capacitors! I've also heard that nonsense and it sounds like nonsense. In fact it was some of the most bizarre sound I ever heard. And what the company sales dweeb telling me how transparent it was. As transparent as trying to listen to a piece of quartz crystal make its own music. Like somebody just shot a BB gun at my car window. That ain't transparent. That's an attack on my senses. That doesn't translate music. That translates to destruction of the music, IMHO. You don't want to shoot your transients out you just want them to pass through. And they do with any quality equipment. If everybody is black and white how are they going to distinguish you from somebody else? He's either transparent or he's colored. So what you basically done is put a negative discriminatory connotation to something of color. You better be careful there. You're saying the whole world should be Caucasian in slightly different terminology. And music isn't like that. No way from here to hell and beyond. Color is the deal. We paint sound with color so you can process it well, internally. Otherwise everything will sound like little 9 inch black-and-white cathode-ray tube televisions and that's the now sound, eh? You're buying into too much advertising. Fine if ya don't have the desk. Then I guess it's necessary? And if you really believe that it's better than a API 325, Neve 1272/3415, that's a fine personal preference for you. But it really ain't better it's just different and they can't take the same amount of input level nor deliver the same kind of output level. And all from those woefully underrated 24 and 30 V bipolar and single ended power supplies. So why does everybody keep trying to reproduce new electronics from these old-school designs? I have for many years, disliked numerous audio Transformers. But they still have an important place in the overall equation of sound. There are no active components that can replace with a transformer does. Yes, it affects the sound. Sometimes you feel like a nut. Sometimes ya don't. Some like dark chocolate some like milk chocolate others like white chocolate. Which one is better? No chocolate. So how much joy have you taken out of life by making it better? Joy comes from feel not from technical accuracy. A good soprano is not a rock 'n roller. A good rock 'n roller, ain't an operatic performer. Which one is better? Which one is less colored, more transparent, clear? It's the operatic singer not the rock and roller. So perhaps if all you are recording is Tosca you might want to opt for your preferred gizmo? Because you want that sonic purity and accuracy. For rock 'n roll, all bets are off. For that you need the color, you need to grunge, you don't want accuracy, you want gold. And that has nothing to do with purity of signal path. So this is nothing more than really a big buffet and you happen to like one dish over some others. Just because you think you're fried frog legs taste better than my dead sushi doesn't make it better. You just don't like sushi. This is not a monochromatic world we live in. Why should our audio be such? That's just a personal take. Which some will take and others will leave it. What was that part about mixing for hours, where you had to keep inching your faders down to prevent overloading your mixing bus? Obviously that person never figured out how to start mixing in the first place? And that's another reason why we have master faders. But then if you're still not doing it right, you are overloading the summing network to begin with anyhow. So all that blather goes right out the window. It's marketing hype. It is to get the beginners to purchase it. I thought you weren't a beginner Chris? I'm basically saying last year's cars are every bit as good as this year's cars. And until my ears tell me differently, I can still hear PCM encoding. DSD far outperforms any PCM format, ever. So why isn't everybody using DSD? It's much more pure, transparent, clean, exceptionally wide bandwidth and no conversion problems to any other lesser format. But our computers are not really quite up to the task yet for that stuff. At least not until next year. Maybe the year after that? Maybe five years from now? Maybe never? And so what does that do to your equation of transparent? I mean I already know plenty of trans parents that seem to do as well and as poorly as those who aren't. So there really hasn't been any real improvement in the human condition. We're the same models they were making a couple of hundred years ago. Some just actually last a little longer today with better preventative maintenance. Like a car running on synthetic oil instead of that nasty gooey stuff from those dead animals. Where's our synthetic gasoline? WTF? Where's all the fuel we could make from all of that fermenting human waste? I mean we know how to distill crude oil. And what is sewage? It's crude oil. The crudest. Crudités? I don't speak any French so I'm not sure I picked the right plug-in? I mean oil refineries already smell awful. How much worse could it be? I don't want to find out. It would work well in New Jersey. Probably nowhere else? LOL. Laughing so hard here, I think my tamales and chocolate milk might come up? I think I got all of the food categories I needed? Vegetables, meat, dairy, transistors. I really don't like the taste of the silicon transistors much. I really like the way the germanium's look, in my garden. And on my PCB board. And they sound lovely in comparison to that cold dry silicon epoxy meatloaf. (I don't think my tamales liked what I said?) Nevertheless Chris, it's not about transparency. It's not about clarity. It's about the sound you produce. That's why we're not just engineers today but producers as well. My equipment is my musical instrument. I don't play a kazoo. In fact I didn't play just one French horn, I played two, simultaneously. So which one is better? The B-flat French horn or the F, French horn? And why would you use one over the other? Because basically what
you are talking about here is musical instruments. Because the flute plays higher than the French horn, does that make the flute better? No. It makes it different. And that's the only difference between that summing box and any other method of analog summing.

It's stuff like this that makes me edge closer to getting out of the business. It's just a new piece of crap that makes it better than an old piece of crap because of marketing. We are already 13 years into the 21st century and we still don't have any usable, musical, true digital microphones. We're not there yet. And even then, it will still likely take some aspects of analog to make it work such as the diaphragm if nothing else. And while they actually exist, they still yet don't exist for our purposes. Neumann & Sennheiser, both told me, they had them. But they also told me was, they could not make them work adequately for musical purposes yet. And when that does come to be, the whole world will change. That and figuring out how to make speakers from something other than coils of wire, magnets and cardboard.

Does anybody remember reading about the flame, " loudspeaker "? I think it's been around since the 1970s? It works. It works incredibly well. It works like no other speaker on the planet. It's just too dangerous to use practically. But it exists. No further work has been done however. This is just another automotive model year in audio. And it's really not necessary. In the box or out-of-the-box, it all sucks if the music ain't good and the performers beat the big weenie. Then all that clarity and transparency only brings you closer to the bad stuff. So I'm really not getting this at all I guess? To me it's all about the technique and not about the stuff. For everybody else, there is the automat.

Don't leave home without it.
Mx. Remy Ann David

The Holy Grail

no need to get your shorts all bunched up. it seems most miss the issue. i would love to still have my jh600 or an API or a Neve for that matter but aside from not being able to afford any of them, even if i could scrape up enough and find a great deal on a console with everyone self recording with cheezeo indochinese equipment who the hell can afford to keep those beasts in usable condition? no one will book enough time in a studio to make it worth the capital investment to purchase and if there's not enough business to support a purchase the sure as f*&K ain't enough cash flow to keep all that gear in usable condition or to pay for the real estate and overhead of a studio.

on top of that the demand for high end gear has plummeted. I have a sh*t load of great reverbs compressors outboard gear that i am trying to dump and i've got no takers. sure they all want the mics and the speakers but no one wants any processing gear. they all use plugs. that's the problem.

what we all are searching for is an affordable solution to the crap summing we have been getting from our DAWs. we were promised the functionality of those behemoth consoles of yesteryear that no one can afford but what we got was sh*t summing.

I don't give a rats ass if joe like transparent and moe likes color. i think there's room for both. just give me something that works. i personally lean towards cheap and flexible so a passive summing solution that i can use my existing pre amps to add color (or not) is what i would love to have. a Folcrum or that new box we just heard about "The Unit" is a great solution imo.

i need twenty grand to open a hot dog stand.  

mmmph! argggh! suicide ahhhh!

exactly, and to add the infamous what for :tongue: ,

Until I owned this, I didn't understand the entire hybrid DAW process or the differences between one or another. Features like stereo/mono switching, mix in, mix out, insert, bypass, mastering section, monitor outs, and most importantly how the monitoring section works (integrates everything accurately) are reasons why one brand is better over another.

Does anyone here know what the Dangerous Monitor ST really does for you?
Is this really just about a 2-bus or is it about hearing what you are doing too and how this integrates with your summing system?
Are you able to actually produce something reliable and rich sounding in a timely manner? Are you hearing your DAW mix or the analog mix and is it accurate? What does your gear sound like if I bypass one section and does the level stay the same and can you fine tune it all? Is there latency.... ??? Is there monitoring switching A/B/C I/O and do you need to adjust the VOLUMES including bass roll off for each speaker and sub sections differently?
We all know how volume fools us! How much does this effect how you mix something you think? So you see, hybrid actually allows us to hear everything more proficiently too, including internet audio.

I could throw 10 questions out and I know I would stump almost everyone when it comes to the detail of these boxes. Just because you've used a console does not tell me you get it.
Each area of my system could warrant a page of discussion here ( and I know you don't want that!) but It would go over most of our heads anyway. Why? , because you don't know what you are missing until you've used it. Its all jibber as it was with me too, before I had what I have.

The differences between a simple set-up and one that is well designed to integrate an entire DAW "hybrid DAW system" becomes really apparent 'AFTER' you start using it. And you cannot know the detail of each piece of the puzzle until you have all the cable, hardware, converters, interface and summing system in place. Did we mention acoustics so you are able to actually hear anything right in the first place.

When I read posts over at gearslutz , opinions about how people tried this and that, ITB is better or just as good, computers are taking over the world ... , it only takes 2 sec to know its all recycled misinformation from thousands of people looking to support their purchase in the age of the computer and Chinese clones. This Includes dealers and shills in the mix, many whom I booted out of here years ago. So what a quagmire of confusion we have to sift through. We should really delete most of all the topics that have to do with this all and start over.

How many people are truly able to rent or buy a complete hybrid system and test it out over a weekend like this? Each one of my racks only using the basics cost me 18 grand and I have 4 of them. Its taken me a year to understand it well and 10 years to piece it together without making too many wrong choices. Pro Tools Hardware was the biggest mistake I ever made. What a trap and a piece of sh&t that whole Avid marketing BS is. Good thing I don't need to make mortgage money in this business anymore for fear I step on the wrong toes around here. Now I do this all for selfish reasons and don't care for one minute who I upset for fear they don't buying ad space here. I like good sound and messing with technology. But I'm not doing this for fun either. Its a growing business in the planning all the time. I'm looking for the real deal all the time.

The Folcrom may be the best intro to hybrid but that little passive box that Kurt mentions is something I want in place of the Folcrom now. Bye bye Folcrom. Oh ya! Here comes some preamp flavour choices to add to my transparent joy! I will be able to add that passive summer like a stomp box in a guitar rack. That's all I want it for. And now I can use a few of my high end preamps planned way ahead for. Yes, Modular ROCKs. I'm not locked into anything or anyone.

100% ITB summing is a joke compared, but its cheap and works for the majority of this economy and sonic direction. Especially for electronic music. Yes We watch the levels, no problem. But its not just about that.
What do you think of the last decade of music? Is it full of rich acoustic information or electronic samples and beats?
It ain't rocket science why this trend is growing. Listen to the music and arrangements .
Don't forget we're hearing opinions from a generation or 2 on all these audio forums who only know Pro Tools/Reaper etc and plug-ins.

One thing for certain though, ITB is BIG! really big but its missing something. So if you want to go OTB, invest in the straightest wire possible and that's why a console sucks compared to this, especially an old one trying to do the hybrid dance.

Are most summing boxes built right? I don't think so but, we grab what we can and hope to find support for our investment and continue this cycle.
Does all this extra gear matter in the end? We're in an economy pushing canned music and Facebook.

Hybrid done right, well i think its awesome but its financially way over the top for anyone just looking to form an opinion over the weekend.

Cheers!

Kevin Big Jam, post: 394621 wrote: I look forward to exploring the new world of analog and headroom. So I finally made up my mind on my equipment which was not even on my initial list. I have decided to up the budget and get the Shadow Hills Equinox as my summing device and an SSL Alphalink system for my converters. I'm real excited to finish the new studio build and get this gear working. I feel the extra channels of summing will really benefit me and the Equinox does the monitor control I needed, has two awesome pre amps and has some very tasty tone control through the transistor choices. I will update once I've put it all to the test. Thanks for the replies.

Kevin,

There is one for sale over at the Slutz:
[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.gearslut…"]Gearslutz.com[/]="http://www.gearslut…"]Gearslutz.com[/]

If you get it, please let us know how you like it.

audiokid, post: 395346 wrote: Kevin,

There is one for sale over at the Slutz:
(Dead Link Removed)

If you get it, please let us know how you like it.

Thanks audiokid, I can't view that section but I have one on route to me anyhow. I should finish the final stages of my studio build by the end of the week so I hope it arrives in time for that so I can finally wire everything up and start mixing again.