Just an update, not been back in the studio in a couple of days, being sick. I did realize during the aftermath of the firmware issue the Orion got, then got fixed, I was to blame, again!. The Total Mix is not difficult, and I did work it out, I just didn't consider the consequence of pushing stuff out to 1/2 and back into 31/32 (my mains) permanently, and subsequent submix setups proved my X-patch settings perfectly sound, minus my stupidity on Total mix :D.

audiokid, post: 423368, member: 1 wrote:
This way you can choose 8 ways to incorporate 8 analog products between the Orion analog I/O. You soon see how one XPatch isn't enough for 32 stems. BUT! As I have discovered, I no longer use analog hardware on the stems. I use the XPatch for a mastering matrix. 8 channels is plenty for this. Its really taking your mixing rig and pushing it all forward into a mastering rig. There is no need to be accumulating redundancies.

Analog (good quality analog) is better closest to the capture.So this means tracking and capturing. :whistle:

As I developed my system, through very detailed listening, I believe there is more benefit in a simple 2-bus mastering matrix. I still use 32 stems but they are all basically summing together via an analog change between the two uncoupled DAW's. This is really where I hear the most benefit out of the hybrid dance. An analog MS mastering process is the bomb. This goes between the two DAW's.

This is why I sold one of my SSL Xpatches. All I need is one XPatch dedicated to my Dangerous Master which is really a M/S 2-bus router.

Follow.

I'm really interested in your opinion about using analog hardware to the stems, as I'm in a similar journey..looking for the best workflow/setup

DAW> Orion32 DA >24 channels of analog stems from the DAW > Dangerous 2.bus+ and d-box (summing 24stems)->Dangerous Master->Dangerous Liaison->Crane song HEDD 192 for DA.

I'm using Liaison as my "router" to use two external processor (2xDave Hill TITAN and a tklizer)... But it´s 2-bus processing..
And I've been thinking if it worth to use analog hardware with groups of stems in the analog domain , or just use analog 2-bus processing and ITB UAD plugins to the groups of stems before going out as analog stems ..

esencia, post: 442597, member: 50057 wrote: I'm really interested in your opinion about using analog hardware to the stems, as I have a similar (but much smaller) setup than you..

DAW> Orion32 DA >24 channels of analog stems from the DAW > Dangerous 2.bus+ and d-box (summing 24stems)->Dangerous Master->Dangerous Liaison->Crane song HEDD 192 for DA.

I'm using Liaison as my "router" to use two external processor (2xDave Hill TITAN and a tklizer)... But it´s 2-bus processing..
And I've been thinking if it worth to use analog hardware with groups of stems in the analog domain , or just use analog 2-bus processing and ITB UAD plugins to the groups of stems before going out as analog stems ..

Welcome to our forums. (y)

Your set-up is excellent.
Its definitely fun grouping analog stems like you are thinking but it really isn't worth the expense or loss of sonic integrally. The Dangerous Master and Liaison are all you ever need. Those together are the best!

I would include capturing your 2-bus on an uncoupled second DAW. I would not round trip back to DAW1 where your mix is.
Mixdown to a second DAW.
DAW> Orion32 DA >24 channels of analog stems from the DAW > Dangerous 2.bus+ and d-box (summing 24stems)->Dangerous Master->Dangerous Liaison->Crane song HEDD 192 for DA.> DAW 2 (y)

I explain this more in the quote below:

audiokid, post: 431556, member: 1 wrote: Yes, its clearer. Thanks.

To expand on my process, we both like uncoupling but my process is quite different than Bos. I take it further.

Pretty much from the time I started hybrid mixing, it has always been uncoupled using two DAW's. Two DAW's allows more options. Especially when you add a superior monitoring system, (which is essential).

Being said, my process has always included mixing and mastering gear but after I emulated my analog MS console, , I've now removed all my mixing and mastering gear and it actually sounds bigger and more spacious when I simply mix into Sequoia on a second DAW. Its awesome.

Regardless of what DAW anyone chooses, regardless of your business or part you play in pro audio, example: you only record, mix, master, or all the above, even a musician who chooses to write and produce for himself as I do everything just said... , I still advise two DAW's just for the monitoring wow and ability to compare. Comparing work has always been how I learn. So its hard not to want to share that part. Id be using two DAW's no matter what I did in music. Its an incredible way to learn and mix.
The uncoupling is an option, not a priority however, I like the ability to avoid bouncing and that is the main reason for uncoupling.

Sequoia on the second DAW has replaced about $100,000 in mixing and mastering gear. A Good trade. ;)

New things I'm trying include a Folcrom and the Millennia M-2b between the uncoupled pass. I don't think I would ever return to a big rig again. DAW's can do most everything now better ITB.
As far as hybrid gear... Less is more. A few analog components seems to be all that is needed to get that mojo. Two much just smears it all up. I give credit to knowing that because I invested in a great monitoring workflow that allows endless ways to compare what happens on DAW1. Samplitude is also one awesome DAW for mixing and mastering. Everything helps but without the monitoring, none of it would be noticeable.
I think you are on the right track, Kyle. Keep researching.

audiokid, post: 442598, member: 1 wrote: Welcome to our forums. (y)

Your set-up is excellent.
Its definitely fun grouping analog stems like you are thinking but it really isn't worth the expense or loss of sonic integrally. The Dangerous Master and Liaison are all you ever need. Those together are the best!

I would include capturing your 2-bus on an uncoupled second DAW. I would not round trip back to DAW1 where your mix is.
Mixdown to a second DAW.
DAW> Orion32 DA >24 channels of analog stems from the DAW > Dangerous 2.bus+ and d-box (summing 24stems)->Dangerous Master->Dangerous Liaison->Crane song HEDD 192 for DA.> DAW 2 (y)

I explain this more in the quote below:

thank you so much.. I've reading posts for more than 4 hours.. Tons of knowledge from all of you.. :)

About your suggestion..... Why do you need two daw? I don´t get the point..
is it because you want to use a different AD DA? Because in my case, I'm using HEDD for AD, and apollo 8 to save that digital signal.

esencia, post: 442601, member: 50057 wrote: thank you so much.. I've reading post for more than 4 hours.. Tons of knowledge from all of you.. :)

You are going to fit right in with us!

esencia, post: 442601, member: 50057 wrote: About your suggestion..... Why do you need two daw? I don´t get the point..
is it because you want to use a different AD DA? Because in my case, I'm using HEDD for AD, and apollo 8 to save that digital signal.

There are many reasons (too many to explain in one post :love:), however, the one big one is.... uncoupling and capturing a mix that goes from example: 96k to 44.1 is special.
If you are already into hybrid at this level of pro, capturing a sum via an up-coupled pass is different. This difference can be subtle to very interesting. It can be more beneficial than gear itself.

Do you have a Bricasti?

audiokid, post: 442603, member: 1 wrote: You are going to fit right in with us!

There are many reasons (too many to explain in one post :love:), however, the one big one is.... uncoupling and capturing a mix that goes from example: 96k to 44.1 is special.
If you are already into hybrid at this level of pro, capturing a sum via an up-coupled pass is different. This difference can be subtle to very interesting. It can be more beneficial than gear itself.

Do you have a Biricasti?

Bricasti reverb? nop... :whistle: why?

I'll put it this way.

If you were my brother and we were in business together, talking about how we can get one step ahead of the pro audio crowd... I would tell you to get a Bricasti, add a second DAW system with mastering quality software plug-ins (I suggest Sequoia or Samplitude but its up to you) , use that HEDD AD 2 channel ADDA and capture your sum, un-coupled from your Dangerous summing system, start listening to what you can do now. ;) and remain loyal to recording.org because you heard it from me/ us... You will be thanking audiokid Boswell forever. :love: We then share our mutual advancement. And so it goes.. (y)

Your D-box may not serve you as well as the Dangerous ST. You would connect your DA's to the 3 inputs of the monitor ST so it enables you to study DAW1 and DAW 2 better.

(edited for better explanation)
Nothing rivals this workflow. But I am also very familiar with this, I mix into a "mixdown or master to learn and give more options like this because I also am very much into sound designing.
I look at mixing no different than I do, sound design. But I also do not necessarily choose to approach mixing like this to change peoples sound, per-say. It is more about improving the acoustic space in a mix... thus, helping open up the sound (which is why we are all doing hybrid in the first place correct?) The goal is to clean up everything from the timing of acoustic reflections, improve phase to improve a more acoustically realistic sounding mix etc...
Plus, to be able to study cause and effects better.
(Note: disable the master section of DAW1 for this particular approach) DAW2 is the master section of DAW1 now.

Its a big topic.

If you can borrow or rent a few things to test this out, I would suggest that before you spend extra money on anything.

Is it all worth it?

I also think we can do a wonderful job with some of the most incredibly affordable, yet technically advanced recording systems today. Just like this.

http://recording.org/threads/presonus-studiolive-32.59736/

esencia, post: 442597, member: 50057 wrote: I'm really interested in your opinion about using analog hardware to the stems, as I'm in a similar journey..looking for the best workflow/setup

DAW> Orion32 DA >24 channels of analog stems from the DAW > Dangerous 2.bus+ and d-box (summing 24stems)->Dangerous Master->Dangerous Liaison->Crane song HEDD 192 for DA.

I'm using Liaison as my "router" to use two external processor (2xDave Hill TITAN and a tklizer)... But it´s 2-bus processing..
And I've been thinking if it worth to use analog hardware with groups of stems in the analog domain , or just use analog 2-bus processing and ITB UAD plugins to the groups of stems before going out as analog stems ..

Killer setup!!!

Audiokid and bozwell are the pioneers of the uncoupled daw, and I've heard the results of it on my on recording.

Basically the way I look at the capture daw, which can be a very modest machine, anything capable of 2trk recording, which is basically any computer or tablet, is for some reason it does the SRC better than any of the algorithms, preserving more of the depth and detail of the stems/mix.

The how's and whys I'm still studying, but that's the reason for the 2nd daw. It. Bypasses the summing, which yor already doing, and then also bypasses the SRC algorithm.

Those are the two things that can affect what the sound of a final mix. The sum, and the SRC.

audiokid, post: 442605, member: 1 wrote: I'll put it this way.

If you were my brother and we were in business together, talking about how we can get one step ahead of the pro audio crowd... I would tell you to get a Bricasti, add a second DAW system with mastering quality software plug-ins (I suggest Sequoia or Samplitude but its up to you) , use that HEDD AD 2 channel ADDA and capture your sum, un-coupled from your Dangerous summing system, start listening to what you can do now. ;) and remain loyal to recording.org because you heard it from me/ us... You will be thanking audiokid Boswell forever. :love: We then share our mutual advancement. And so it goes.. (y)

Your D-box may not serve you as well as the Dangerous ST. You would connect your DA's to the 3 inputs of the monitor ST so it enables you to study DAW1 and DAW 2 better.

(edited for better explanation)
Nothing rivals this workflow. But I am also very familiar with this, I mix into a "mixdown or master to learn and give more options like this because I also am very much into sound designing.
I look at mixing no different than I do, sound design. But I also do not necessarily choose to approach mixing like this to change peoples sound, per-say. It is more about improving the acoustic space in a mix... thus, helping open up the sound (which is why we are all doing hybrid in the first place correct?) The goal is to clean up everything from the timing of acoustic reflections, improve phase to improve a more acoustically realistic sounding mix etc...
Plus, to be able to study cause and effects better.
(Note: disable the master section of DAW1 for this particular approach) DAW2 is the master section of DAW1 now.

Its a big topic.

If you can borrow or rent a few things to test this out, I would suggest that before you spend extra money on anything.

Deal!
WOW..it´s imposible to be more clear... thank you so much for sharing with me that little treasure...

If I understood correctly (please , correct me if I'm wrong)

1. Reduce the quantity of analog gear for mixing purposes.. Just use good ITB plugins as UAD ones to process all the tracks, subgroups, stems, before going to analog domain.
2. Keep an analog summing unit is not bad, and at some terms could add some value as it has tons of headroom
3. Use Liaison to manage 2-bus processing, but just with selected gear..not tons: May be one EQ, one Compressor, and Bricasti (I'd like to understand why is so important this peace here). Use another AD (Crane song in my case), for printing 2-bus signal on another SW (wavelab, amplitude, sequoia).
4. Dangerous Master console will have two analog signals (inputs), one after analog summing, one from ITB master signal. And then, in combination with Liaison and Dangerous ST or Avocet, we could compare:
   class="xf-ul">
   
   • Input 1. ITB analog signal, with/without Liaison (it´s an option within DM)
   • Input 2. 2-bus signal/Summing signal, with/without Liaison (it´s an option within DM)
   • Input 3. The digital signal from Crane Song , as that is the real digital sound (the one after convertion)

   class="xf-ul">

   *So DAW2 is mainly for use another SW for printing and another AD, and feed that signal as another input into the console. Technicaly that could be done from a single powerful server with two different interfaces and SW at the same time, I assume. In this situation we could use one software at 44Khz for mixing and 88khz for mastering , or 48Khz and 96Khz as we are using two interfaces.

esencia, post: 442622, member: 50057 wrote: Deal!
WOW..it´s imposible to be more clear... thank you so much for sharing with me that little treasure...

:)

esencia, post: 442622, member: 50057 wrote: If I understood correctly (please , correct me if I'm wrong)

1. Reduce the quantity of analog gear for mixing purposes.. Just use good ITB plugins as UAD ones to process all the tracks, subgroups, stems, before going to analog domain.
2. Keep an analog summing unit is not bad, and at some terms could add some value as it has tons of headroom
3. Use Liaison to manage 2-bus processing, but just with selected gear..not tons: May be one EQ, one Compressor, and Bricasti (I'd like to understand why is so important this peace here). Use another AD (Crane song in my case), for printing 2-bus signal on another SW (wavelab, amplitude, sequoia).
4. Dangerous Master console will have two analog signals (inputs), one after analog summing, one from ITB master signal. And then, in combination with Liaison and Dangerous ST or Avocet, we could compare:
   class="xf-ul">

I would avoid #4. but the beauty of this, there are many ways to making great sounding music.

I would DAW1> 24 DA into a analog matrix which could be a analog console, summing box or the Dangerous Master. I would use the 3 inputs of the Dangerous Master to route analog gear. Thus, targeting your final mixdown M/S > AD to DAW2 and finalize the master ITB > upload online and be done with it. I would use ITB mastering software on DAW2 and actually avoid most analog mastering gear as I feel plug-ins are better in the mastering world to analog now. I discovered this after using the best mastering gear I could get my hands on, then comparing the integral of the transients and imaging. Real time SRC via a 2-DAW mixdown > DAW2 .... ITB mastering on DAW2 won every-time.

That being said,

I would not use the Liaison as an additional router with the Dangerous Master. I would likely sell the Liaison as it is bloat to me but if you use a lot of gear and also like various analog tools to be in front or behind, then the Liaison would make a nice switching router, as this is really what it is designed for.
When comparing the Liaison to a digital router then.... I prefer the SSL X-Patch to the Liaison because it can be configured to switch gear better than the Liaison via a mouse or MIDI command. Seamlessly, automated and expandable.

esencia, post: 442622, member: 50057 wrote: *So DAW2 is mainly for use another SW for printing and another AD, and feed that signal as another input into the console. Technicaly that could be done from a single powerful server with two different interfaces and SW at the same time, I assume. In this situation we could use one software at 44Khz for mixing and 88khz for mastering , or 48Khz and 96Khz as we are using two interfaces.

Not really but you could look at it that way too. But I would never return back.

The idea of my workflow, I go one direction > Never back unless I am actually breaking down tracks to import.
In other words...

Talent Source> AD> DAW1 > DA> (SSL X-Patch or Liaison)> 1, 2, 3 > Dangerous Master (including Bricasti, Pultec, BAX filter, Comps etc) > 2 mix > AD> DAW2 = ITB mixdown M/S limiter> online.

Monitoring controller connects to all these sections.

1. DAW1, > Monitor input A

2. Dangerous Master Monitor A/B out > Monitor input B
3. DAW2 > Monitor input C
4. Online DA Monitor input D
   class="xf-ul">
   3 sets of speakers plus sub is connected to all these sections so you can study cause and effect of every part of your talent, the mix and the changes you make before and after during the set up of microphones to how a track or complete mixdown processes on DAW1, Dangerous Master, DAW2 or online. Absolute dope recording, mixing and mastering system.

This setup is 100% fluid meaning, you never have to leave DAW1, you can round trip back to DAW1 or keep going to DAW2.
You can network both computers to share data back and forth. You can capture music online via the DAW2 and simply stay in a 2-bus approach as well.

audiokid, post: 442651, member: 1 wrote: Talent Source> AD> DAW1 > DA> (SSL X-Patch or Liaison)> 1, 2, 3 > Dangerous Master (including Bricasti, Pultec, BAX filter, Comps etc) > 2 mix > AD> DAW2 = ITB mixdown M/S limiter> online.

Love it.