I would like to hear what others have to say about analog summing. I'm currently nearing the end of the mixdown stage for a very prestigious Latin project.
We started the mixing on an SSL console, but discovered that ITB (in-the-box) mixing sounded much better after comparison. I mean, many degrees better.
We then redid the SSL mixes in the box, so now almost the whole project has been mixed this way, one more song to go.
I have friends and colleagues who swear by the process of analog summing, and they strongly suggest I do this, rather than just sending it off to mastering.. The client is open to anything that could possibly make it sound better, and I always approach these sorts of things with an open mind. Never too old to learn!
I have listened to “before and after” summing and truly hear no appreciable difference.
I've heard examples of summing done through a Neve VR, SSL G+, and a Dangerous box by different people, not just one.
Still, no "wow" factor.
I am a skeptic by nature and require hard evidence, and when I hear terms like “warmth”, “width”, “adds life to a mix” etc., bandied about, I usually need to hear something that is undeniable rather than subjective descriptions of what could easily be the power of suggestion. Maybe even to see something on test equipment display that proves the claims of the phase cohesion and width, those being just a few of the many supposed attributes claimed to be the result of summing.
We've all experienced the phenomenon of being deep into a mix on a console, and adjusting an EQ that is not engaged but still hearing subtle changes as if it were turned on.
Or, listening to the same mix twice thinking that they are two versions and when asked which one you like better, believing that there were differences, going so far as to even describe them.
(Anyone remember seeing people draping tissue paper on NS-10 tweeters?)
That's it so far. Thanks in advance for anyone's reply. If you know of any sites that would give me more insight, please post links.
Should we decide to do try summing, I'll then be back with more inquiries regarding methodology, since from what I've read so far there seems to be so many.
regards,
Dave Kowalski
DAvid Kowalski-Engineer
Recording-Mixing-Mastering
http://www.davidkow…"]DAvid Kowalski-Engineer[/]="http://www.davidkow…"]DAvid Kowalski-Engineer[/]
dave@davidkowalski.com
Topic Tags
Comments
I think any DAW is better than no capture DAW. I'm of the mind
I think any DAW is better than no capture DAW.
I'm of the mind set that Mastering is not something we do to fix a mix. I like to think of it as something we do at the end of a mix which included the added limiting and very basic EQ tweaks. So yes, you are thinking along the same lines as me.
Mix your work as great as you can and if you don't need an ME, all the power to you. Bottom line there, some of us are better at finishing than others. This process can help you get there.
Both Bos and I agree that the change that happens between an uncoupled pass is nice, very nice. I wouldn't want to loose that but its not the only reason I choose to use this system.
Chris, did you mean Samplitude Pro X2 or Pro X2 suite? Seems li
Chris, did you mean Samplitude Pro X2 or Pro X2 suite? Seems like the Pro X2 is all I would ultimately need for final mixing/sound shaping in DAW2. I want to be sure the computer I get will accommodate the final DAW adequately even though, to save a bit right now so I can get a quality 2 channel ADC, I'll likely download Audacity.
I could use some practical advice on choosing between a laptop/tower.
So, Laptop or tower? I have a choice and am leaning toward a tower so I can keep it off the desk and have slots for upgrading/firewire etc. if needed. Right now I am using 2 screens and could easily dedicate one to DAW2 and not decrease space on the desk...easier to keep the second keyboard and mouse out of the way as well. What do you all think?
Also, I could really use some advice on how to go about deciding on which quality 2 channel ADC to purchase. Is spending 2k or more necessary or can something in the $500-1k range be of high enough quality? What are you folks using if you don't mind my asking? I would prefer to make this a one time purchase and not have to upgrade later if possible. I want to give it a permanent home in the rack and not move it about or use it for other purposes elsewhere. Suggestions on particular brands and models would be great.
Hope I'm not rambling or asking too much here. I'm getting pumped! The local computer shop guy is into this as well and a big help. He admits little knowledge of recording etc. but is really having a good time getting his head around this and trying to help. I think he can set me up fine for around $240-$300 and I'm ready to make a purchase once I get these details sorted out. Fixing up what I have for computers would cost close to that and not be as good as what he has. Guess it's time to commit to listing the Big Ben!
namaste
vibrations1951, post: 429180, member: 34341 wrote: Chris, did yo
vibrations1951, post: 429180, member: 34341 wrote: Chris, did you mean Samplitude Pro X2 or Pro X2 suite?
I use Sequoia so I'm not familiar with what version Samplitude to recommend other than suggesting to get the version with the Mastering suite.
vibrations1951, post: 429180, member: 34341 wrote: So, Laptop or tower? I have a choice and am leaning toward a tower so I can keep it off the desk and have slots for upgrading/firewire etc. if needed. Right now I am using 2 screens and could easily dedicate one to DAW2 and not decrease space on the desk...easier to keep the second keyboard and mouse out of the way as well. What do you all think?
I use a tower and also a laptop. Both my tower and laptop have an HDMI port. I also tried an KVM but found two monitors and HDMI is much better so I bought a cheap screen at costco for the capture DAW. Its very helpful seeing your mix screen while capturing (both at the same time).
vibrations1951, post: 429180, member: 34341 wrote: Also, I could really use some advice on how to go about deciding on which quality 2 channel ADC to purchase.
You need a converter with both AD and DA. The DA is where you monitor off of so keep than in mind.
The better the ADC the better. I use Prism, have used Lavry, RME and Antelope. I eventually went with Prism because I double it as a capture "location" converter. Whatever you get, you need the DA as well. USB is fine. I'd be looking on GS for a used converter. Think mastering and look at capturing like an ME. I'm not saying you need to invest in ME high end, but just think like them. You are entering the world of mastering. Learn what they are doing. Its the secret to all this and more.
vibrations1951, post: 429180, member: 34341 wrote: Hope I'm not rambling or asking too much here. I'm getting pumped!
Not at all. Its cool to see someone going for it. Good for you.
FF 800 are cool:
http://recording.org/threads/old-rme-fireface-800-used-is-it-worth-it.58647/#post-429178
audiokid, post: 429181, member: 1 wrote: I use Sequoia so I'm no
audiokid, post: 429181, member: 1 wrote: I use Sequoia so I'm not familiar with what version Samplitude to recommend other than suggesting to get the version with the Mastering suite.
I use a tower and also a laptop. Both my tower and laptop have an HDMI port. I also tried an KVM but found two monitors and HDMI is much better so I bought a cheap screen at costco for the capture DAW. Its very helpful seeing your mix screen while capturing (both at the same time).
You need a converter with both AD and DA. The DA is where you monitor off of so keep than in mind.
The better the ADC the better. I use Prism, have used Lavry, RME and Antelope. I eventually went with Prism because I double it as a capture "location" converter. Whatever you get, you need the DA as well. USB is fine. I'd be looking on GS for a used converter. Think mastering and look at capturing like an ME. I'm not saying you need to invest in ME high end, but just think like them. You are entering the world of mastering. Learn what they are doing. Its the secret to all this and more.Not at all. Its cool to see someone going for it. Good for you.
FF 800 are cool:
http://recording.org/threads/old-rme-fireface-800-used-is-it-worth-it.58647/#post-429178
Thanks Chris. All helpful stuff here for me!
So do you have any thoughts about the pros and cons of the UCX verses the FF800 for my 2 track mix capture?
I think the UFX sure would be great but just overkill for my purposes, even in the long run.
That link was very helpful by the way! RME may turn out to be a good choice for me. Way down the road, who knows, but this quality level could probably do me well for some time into the future.
I used the Blacks (AD 11, DA11) Fwiw, the difference between a
I used the Blacks (AD 11, DA11)
Fwiw, the difference between a ff800 and the Blacks was enough to know their are differences between converters. Lavry is stellar as is Prism and higher end RME.
That being said, I dont think you need to spend what i have. I would look to Antelope now. They are actually leading in exactly where this is going.
I am currently at our lake so online surfing isnt an option to research but check out their new 2 channel systems.
Orher than that, im not familiar with other converters . I think you can get something new that is stellar for around $2000, ysed for half that. Maybe renting something for a month just to see how this plays for you would be wise.
If I was to do it all over again, for a business, i would invest in great tracking gear and a simple but very high quailty 2 Daw mixing / capture system like I talk about now. I would completly avoid using a console or other analog mixing gear. Software and converters are were i look now.
Hope this helps.
audiokid, post: 429193, member: 1 wrote: I used the Blacks (AD 1
audiokid, post: 429193, member: 1 wrote: I used the Blacks (AD 11, DA11)
Fwiw, the difference between a ff800 and the Blacks was enough to know their are differences between converters. Lavry is stellar as is Prism and higher end RME.That being said, I dont think you need to spend what i have. I would look to Antelope now. They are actually leading in exactly where this is going.
I am currently at our lake so online surfing isnt an option to research but check out their new 2 channel systems.
Orher than that, im not familiar with other converters . I think you can get something new that is stellar for around $2000, ysed for half that. Maybe renting something for a month just to see how this plays for you would be wise.
If I was to do it all over again, for a business, i would invest in great tracking gear and a simple but very high quailty 2 Daw mixing / capture system like I talk about now. I would completly avoid using a console or other analog mixing gear. Software and converters are were i look now.
Hope this helps.
Helps heaps Chris! I looked at the Antelope Audio Pure 2 and man it really seems to fit the bill. I checked through GS classified quite a bit. I would be spending more and not on exactly what I need. I checked ebay as well and I'm just not coming up with what I need without extras beyond AD/DA and even in this price range for used. I am tempted by Jeff's FF800 and the price is right, I'm just not feeling I would be happy with it in the long run and would swap out later. I don't have the options to rent around here.
I'm not sold on no analog gear at all but who knows? I still have a strong desire to use either a control surface or reasonable analog console as well. Time will tell and that is a couple of years away. I just have such a hard time with a mouse...getting better with a keypad for commands so that might help these
old hands. Maybe a better mouse as well.
For now my plan is to use my DAW1 (Nuendo 4)> Aurora 16>Mix Wiz 16>Antelope Audio Pure 2/?????>DAW2 (Audacity for now). I know the Mix Wiz and the Audacity are weak links in the chain but for now this could work. I could also do some comparing by bypassing the Mix Wiz completely and see what I get.
So your thoughts about my ideas here? I also welcome anyone else that may have thoughts about this all as well. This is a really big leap for me but one I've been strongly considering for a while now.
Namaste
audiokid, post: 429210, member: 1 wrote: (y) Chris So before I m
audiokid, post: 429210, member: 1 wrote: (y)
Chris
So before I make this leap I'm wondering about only 1 set of monitor outs with the Pure2. I'm guessing that with a separate monitoring device (hopefully Dangerous Monitor ST), one TRS set off the DAW2 is all I need anyway.
All other monitoring will come from the other stages in my recording/mixing chain through a Dangerous Monitor ST as well right?? I will need to integrate my Hear Back system too but that would occur some where between the Aurora and Pure2. Just don't want to create more than I need to down the line.
Am I thinking correctly?
I'll want to decide before a good Memorial Day Sale ends tomorrow!
Namaste
Yes. The ST connects your monitor(s) and out puts in multiple wa
Yes.
The ST connects your monitor(s) and out puts in multiple ways.
Meaning
You can get away with one set of monitors but still be able to select where you are listening at any given stage (a flick of a switch).
You connect your daw, your console and the capture to it. This enabkes you to make solid decisions based on what that section sounds like. Its a must tool for serious hybrid sound engineering..
You will clearly hear what your console is doing in the mix. Which us why we are doing all this in the first place. It enables three wsy comparisons of recording, mixing and capturing. :)
Im glad you are taking my advice in this. Good for you!
audiokid, post: 429228, member: 1 wrote: Yes. The ST connects yo
audiokid, post: 429228, member: 1 wrote: Yes.
The ST connects your monitor(s) and out puts in multiple ways.Meaning
You can get away with one set of monitors but still be able to select where you are listening at any given stage (a flick of a switch).You connect your daw, your console and the capture to it. This enabkes you to make solid decisions based on what that section sounds like. Its a must tool for serious hybrid sound engineering..
You will clearly hear what your console is doing in the mix. Which us why we are doing all this in the first place. It enables three wsy comparisons of recording, mixing and capturing. :)Im glad you are taking my advice in this. Good for you!
Great! The deeper I go the more this makes sense and the more it seems like it could be a good fit for my situation all around (Quality, Bang for buck, workflow). Now to purchase the Antelope Pure 2, list my Big Ben and purchase a refurb. computer.
No turning back now! Wish me luck!
Namaste
Got 10% off on a new Antelope Pure2! $1975.50 lighter and "...fe
Got 10% off on a new Antelope Pure2! $1975.50 lighter and "...feeling like a June bride! Know I'm gettin' it just not exactly sure when!" Time to sell anything not nailed down.
Thanks for sticking with me Chris. And many thanks to Bos, Donny, Kurt and Ethan as well for your posts and comments. All good info to help me decide where I'm going for now.
I'll post once it's up and running or if I need some help before then.
Namaste
vibrations1951, post: 429148, member: 34341 wrote: So I'm not su
vibrations1951, post: 429148, member: 34341 wrote: So I'm not sure if I can easily have RAM added as well as F disc the Acer for use of the maximum 136GB hard drive disc space and get it back up to decent operation. I may need a different computer.
If your system is 32 bit, then it doesn't matter how much more memory you would add, as that OS will only allow a maximum of 4 gig to be used anyway, and if your OS is taking 2 gig from that right off the top from the get-go, that's not leaving you a whole lot to work with.
You're better off to get into a newer computer, 64 bit, with a minimum of 8 gig of RAM ( which is generally the minimum of what most newer computers come with anyway). It's not that Samp can't run with 4 gig, it's that you'll likely find that you'll be limited in the amount of processing and VSTi's that you'd be able to use, and besides, it won't really have 4 gig to access. It will only have what is left over after what your OS eats.
I started out using Samp with 8 gig, and it worked fine, but it wasn't long before I ended up adding another 8 gig stick, which allowed me to do more within Samp. It also resulted in me having a more stable system. Things ran smoother after I added the additional RAM.
If I were you, I'd not plan on using your current computer. It's probably just going to end up frustrating you. Look into something more current....something with a Quad core 64 bit system, 8 gig RAM (minimum), and with an internal HDD that is capable of running your programs. I would then add another HDD - which would hold VSTi's and any libraries you might have. Get a drive large enough to also be able to store backups of all your projects. Memory and storage aren't all that expensive these days.
Trying to upgrade your existing computer to meet the needs of modern DAW production requirements is going to be like throwing money into a hole. You'll be much happier with a more current computer - and more creative, too, because you won't have to spend time continually dealing with the inadequacies of your older computer.
DonnyThompson, post: 429246, member: 46114 wrote: If your system
DonnyThompson, post: 429246, member: 46114 wrote: If your system is 32 bit, then it doesn't matter how much more memory you would add, as that OS will only allow a maximum of 4 gig to be used anyway, and if your OS is taking 2 gig from that right off the top from the get-go, that's not leaving you a whole lot to work with.
You're better off to get into a newer computer, 64 bit, with a minimum of 8 gig of RAM ( which is generally the minimum of what most newer computers come with anyway). It's not that Samp can't run with 4 gig, it's that you'll likely find that you'll be limited in the amount of processing and VSTi's that you'd be able to use, and besides, it won't really have 4 gig to access. It will only have what is left over after what your OS eats.
I started out using Samp with 8 gig, and it worked fine, but it wasn't long before I ended up adding another 8 gig stick, which allowed me to do more within Samp. It also resulted in me having a more stable system. Things ran smoother after I added the additional RAM.
If I were you, I'd not plan on using your current computer. It's probably just going to end up frustrating you. Look into something more current....something with a Quad core 64 bit system, 8 gig RAM (minimum), and with an internal HDD that is capable of running your programs. I would then add another HDD - which would hold VSTi's and any libraries you might have. Get a drive large enough to also be able to store backups of all your projects. Memory and storage aren't all that expensive these days.
Trying to upgrade your existing computer to meet the needs of modern DAW production requirements is going to be like throwing money into a hole. You'll be much happier with a more current computer - and more creative, too, because you won't have to spend time continually dealing with the inadequacies of your older computer.
I was wrong before. I am running 8 core,, 1.5 terabyte, 64 bit with Nuendo 4 as my DAW1 (Recording, mixing, editing). I really should add more RAM to the Mac it is on cause as I remember it has 4-6 gig?? DAW 2 will eventually have Samplitude. DAW2, being the 2-bus capture device/"mastering"/final processing, I don't believe I'll be using many VSTi's or big libraries but I could be wrong here as this 2 box set up is very new to me. Because of this I was thinking the Samplitude Pro X2 with the mastering but not the full "Suite" version because I don't believe I will be using all the extras. Your thoughts about this??
Your suggestions are very helpful. You are so right about my old computers! I will be going with 64 bit and you make a good point about RAM and probably 8 gig minimum is the way to go for now. I have a 3 terabyte HDD. I'll have to do some shopping to see what makes the most sense, new or used computer. The local computer guy had some newer PC towers with Windows 8 used but I'll have to check in with him tomorrow. I can't remember the specs on them. He is a PC guy and I don't really have strong preferences either way. Even though I got a Mac for DAW 1, the majority of my work and home life has been on a PC, so unless you think otherwise, it will probably be a PC.
Many thanks
Namaste
DonnyThompson, post: 429257, member: 46114 wrote: Sorry - I was
DonnyThompson, post: 429257, member: 46114 wrote: Sorry - I was confused, apparently. I thought you were planning on using the 32 bit Aspire as your main DAW.
No problem Donny.
I was but after checking into upgrading etc. it became apparent real quickly that this was probably a poor choice. Just the same, your comments were very helpful in determining what to run for a final DAW. I checked Mouser and others and the refurb Dell's look good. New is about double. I'll have to see what the hometown guy can do.
What are your thoughts about Samplitude Pro X2 verses the Pro x2 Suite for my application as DAW?
vibrations1951, post: 429259, member: 34341 wrote: What are your
vibrations1951, post: 429259, member: 34341 wrote: What are your thoughts about Samplitude Pro X2 verses the Pro x2 Suite for my application as DAW?
I haven't upgraded to Samplitude 2 yet, I'm still using the original Pro X Suite version of Samp.
From what I understand, the difference(s) between Pro X2 and ProX 2 Suite are that Pro x 2 doesn't come with the Independence or Vita VSTi sample libraries, and (I'm not 100% positive about this next part) I don't believe it comes with the Spectral Editing/Restoration feature, either - but - you should check with someone else about this to confirm it. You might want to jump over to Samplitude's user forum and do a search on the subject: http://support2.magix.net/boards/samplitude//index.php?act=idx, or, visit their main page, which might list the differences between the two.
I do have plans to upgrade (Pro X 2 Suite) in the near future - but right now, I'm about 75% done with a client's album project - which has been very lengthy, and which at times has also been somewhat complex in both production and arrangement - and I'm nervous about making any changes to my current Samp platform before this project is wrapped and in the can.
I know I'm probably being over-cautious, and likely, I would probably be fine - but, if there's even the slightest chance that something - anything - might go wrong and make the train jump the track, I can't risk having even the slightest possibility of anything going wrong at this point .
:)
DonnyThompson, post: 429260, member: 46114 wrote: I haven't upgr
DonnyThompson, post: 429260, member: 46114 wrote: I haven't upgraded to Samplitude 2 yet, I'm still using the original Pro X Suite version of Samp.
From what I understand, the difference(s) between Pro X2 and ProX 2 Suite are that Pro x 2 doesn't come with the Independence or Vita VSTi sample libraries, and (I'm not 100% positive about this next part) I don't believe it comes with the Spectral Editing/Restoration feature, either - but - you should check with someone else about this to confirm it. You might want to jump over to Samplitude's user forum and do a search on the subject: http://support2.magix.net/boards/samplitude//index.php?act=idx, or, visit their main page, which might list the differences between the two.
I do have plans to upgrade (Pro X 2 Suite) in the near future - but right now, I'm about 75% done with a client's album project - which has been very lengthy, and which at times has also been somewhat complex in both production and arrangement - and I'm nervous about making any changes to my current Samp platform before this project is wrapped and in the can.
I know I'm probably being over-cautious, and likely, I would probably be fine - but, if there's even the slightest chance that something - anything - might go wrong and make the train jump the track, I can't risk having even the slightest possibility of anything going wrong at this point .
:)
Donny you are correct about the Spectral Editing/Restoration feature not in Pro x2...I'm going to need to really think on this before going the extra $500 for that alone. I have time.
I'm with ya on not wanting to make a change in the middle of things! There's always a Gremlin or two lurking around the corner.
FWIW I'm looking at a desktop computer system right now with 4 core, AMD A8-3850, 2.90 GHZ, 4 gig ram (he will up to 16), 64 bit, Windows 7.
System is about 4 years old. He has over $400 on it and will work with me on the price. He's going to check comparisons on new as well. Down the road I'd rather have the support of a local shop rather than online store and he will stand behind all sales...
Pro X 2 Suite included: Exclusive to this package are the Analog
Pro X 2 Suite included:
Exclusive to this package are the Analog Modelling Suite Plus, Vandal guitar and bass amplifier, the Independence Sampler Workstation (includes a 70 GB Premium Library), as well as Loudness Metering in accordance with EBU R128/ITU-R BS.1771.
fwiw, I've currently replaced $30,000 in analog compressors, $16,000 in analog EQ's and the Dangerous Master having AM Munition and a second DAW. I think AM Munition is part of the Suite but maybe you can get it separately.
Never the less... Pretty good trade.
Independence is useless to me but I do need the mastering section and Vari Verb.
The spectral editing is awesome if you get business ( mixing or mastering service) removing stuff in a mix that you know is a problem. I use it to clean up tracks sent to me. If you are in control of your own recording, then maybe its added bloat?
audiokid, post: 429270, member: 1 wrote: Pro X 2 Suite included:
audiokid, post: 429270, member: 1 wrote: Pro X 2 Suite included:
fwiw, I've currently replaced $30,000 in analog compressors, $16,000 in analog EQ's and the Dangerous Master having AM Munition and a second DAW. I think AM Munition is part of the Suite but maybe you can get it separately.
Never the less... Pretty good trade.Independence is useless to me but I do need the mastering section and Vari Verb.
The spectral editing is awesome if you get business ( mixing or mastering service) removing stuff in a mix that you know is a problem. I use it to clean up tracks sent to me. If you are in control of your own recording, then maybe its added bloat?
I 'll have to think more clearly about my market and needs before making a final decision about Samp. products. Your process is worth a lot to my thinking Chris. I like where this is heading for me because it feels like that space between the 2 boxes leaves me plenty of options to add, mix and match to my heart's (and pocketbook's) content and check out each option in a rational and thrifty manner as I go along.
Question for you Chris.
Do I understand you correctly to mean that one can take the summed stereo 2-bus from DAW1 @ original tracking SR & bit rate, directly to your box 2 through converters (Box 1 A-D-A 2-bus decouple (wire) Box 2 2-bus A-D-new SR & bit depth etc.)?
I ask because I will have my mixer in between the 2 boxes for the summing and wondered if I can do monitoring from the 2-bus from Box 1 at the same time without needing to reconfigure things significantly each time.
I guess that would depend upon saving 2 channels of the 16 available sends to my mixer from the Aurora (Box 1) for a stereo 2-bus from DAW 1 while limiting up to 12 tracks to the mixer or whatever else is available?
Am I thinking correctly here?? Am I making any sense??
If so then I will need to become more skilled with busing in Daw 1 to stems for sends to mixer/whatever. I need to more of this anyway so time to practice is now.
vibrations1951, post: 429283, member: 34341 wrote: Do I understa
vibrations1951, post: 429283, member: 34341 wrote: Do I understand you correctly to mean that one can take the summed stereo 2-bus from DAW1 @ original tracking SR & bit rate, directly to your box 2 through converters (Box 1 A-D-A 2-bus decouple (wire) Box 2 2-bus A-D-new SR & bit depth etc.)?
yes :)
With this workflow, you can be tracking @ example: 96k and capturing @ 44.1 etc. Both DAWs are independent. Is that your question?
vibrations1951, post: 429283, member: 34341 wrote: I ask because I will have my mixer in between the 2 boxes for the summing and wondered if I can do monitoring from the 2-bus from Box 1 at the same time without needing to reconfigure things significantly each time.
Yes, if I understand your question, especially if you are using a monitor controller like the Dangerous ST. You can monitor off the console (its monitor bus), your DAW 1 and Capture all at the same time.
Example:
DAW1 DA > ST input 1 ( speakers A, B, C, plus sub)
Console monitor out ST input 2 ( speakers A, B, C, plus sub)
Capture DA > ST input 3 ( speakers A, B, C, plus sub)
Even though I can monitor off my console(s) I never trust my consoles as the final source because it isn't the destination. I monitor off the console solely to hear what the console is doing for other reasons. This is why a 2 DAW system is so special and why monitoring off your capture is choice. You learn what each step is doing but trust the capture the most.
In regards to monitoring... Nothing relies on conversion here. Its totally analog monitoring regardless of SR.
Is this what you are asking?
Yes thanks. You answered most all my questions. I get that about
Yes thanks. You answered most all my questions. I get that about conversion not affecting monitoring.
What I was not sure about was getting my individual tracks from box 1 to the Mixer and still being able to take a 2-bus analog stereo mix off box 1 at the same time for monitoring it alone.
So when I said:
"... 2 channels of the 16 available sends to my mixer from the Aurora (Box 1) for a stereo 2-bus from DAW 1 while limiting up to 12 tracks to the mixer or whatever else is available?" I was thinking correctly? I think I should know this but haven't had a chance to try it yet.
I do have my Box 1 feeding 16 channels of the Mix Wiz and I realize how subjective this is but it is different alone in avery special way already. Moer on that later.I'm pumped!
Namaste
cool. vibrations1951, post: 429292, member: 34341 wrote: What I
cool.
vibrations1951, post: 429292, member: 34341 wrote: What I was not sure about was getting my individual tracks from box 1 to the Mixer and still being able to take a 2-bus analog stereo mix off box 1 at the same time for monitoring it alone.
Whatever you are doing now, adding the second DAW in this equation won't change the channels needed on how you are summing now. You are simply extending your options on how you capture the 2-bus(s). I'm sure you get this now but just to reiterate : If you get a monitor controller with a min of 3 analog summing inputs, you will be able to study your mixes at three points now rather than two ( DAW1 and Console) . (make sense?).
The 2nd converters DA allows you to connect its DA to the monitor controller too! Your Aurora doesn't effect that. Realistically , you don't even need to monitor DAW1 once you are mixing OTB heading to DAW2. So, during tracking the Aurora is 16 ADDA as it would be now, nice tight low latency. Once you are mixing, you stem 16 DA from DAW1 into your console, 2-bus the analog sum into DAW2 conversion AD. DA DAW2 into the monitor controller that is monitoring all your sums.
Confusing until you start doing it.. but so simple and so awesome!
4 coreTE="audiokid, post: 429293, member: 1"]cool. Whatever yo
4 coreTE="audiokid, post: 429293, member: 1"]cool.
Whatever you are doing now, adding the second DAW in this equation won't change the channels needed on how you are summing now. You are simply extending your options on how you capture the 2-bus(s). I'm sure you get this now but just to reiterate : If you get a monitor controller with a min of 3 analog summing inputs, you will be able to study your mixes at three points now rather than two ( DAW1 and Console) . (make sense?).
The 2nd converters DA allows you to connect its DA to the monitor controller too! Your Aurora doesn't effect that. Realistically , you don't even need to monitor DAW1 once you are mixing OTB heading to DAW2. So, during tracking the Aurora is 16 ADDA as it would be now, nice tight low latency. Once you are mixing, you stem 16 DA from DAW1 into your console, 2-bus the analog sum into DAW2 conversion AD. DA DAW2 into the monitor controller that is monitoring all your sums.
Confusing until you start doing it.. but so simple and so awesome!
And I think I am confusing matters more than needed at this point. I just gotta get down to it and work it! I settled on a CPU today with these specs: AMD 4 core, 64 bit, 500GB HDD, 2.90GHZ, 12 gig RAM (will accommodate up to 32gig), Windows 7.
If I did my research correctly this should handle most any Samplitude package I put together for the DAW2. I'm also going to upgrade my cpu in Box 1. It now has 6 gig RAM and I'll likely add another 16 gig unless my wifey catches up with me first! She says finishing the kitchen is in hard competition and .....well...she has a point! I'll have to impress her with my ebay sales....
Namaste
vibrations1951, post: 429317, member: 34341 wrote: And I think I
vibrations1951, post: 429317, member: 34341 wrote: And I think I am confusing matters more than needed at this point. I just gotta get down to it and work it!
No worries. Its a new step , not something you can discuss with anyone on any forum either. I personally don't know many people who do it to this extent. I have a ME friend in Bulgaria who is now summing like this and he is hiding his system so no-one see's what he is doing. ;) There was a time I didn't want to talk about this too but I'm retiring soon and its just fun discussing it all now.
Its a great system but you still need ears. And ears are what separate the boys from the men in this business anyway. This is a process that helps you hear it all better.
vibrations1951, post: 429320, member: 34341 wrote: Good to hear! I'll post again when everything arrives and I get this all together, up and running. Oh boy!
Indeed. I'm confident you are never going to turn back. I look forward to sharing notes and being my official 2 DAW buddy.
audiokid, post: 429321, member: 1 wrote: No worries. Its a new s
audiokid, post: 429321, member: 1 wrote: No worries. Its a new step , not something you can discuss with anyone on any forum either. I personally don't know many people who do it to this extent. I have a ME friend in Bulgaria who is now summing like this and he is hiding his system so no-one see's what he is doing. ;) There was a time I didn't want to talk about this too but I'm retiring soon and its just fun discussing it all now.
Its a great system but you still need ears. And ears are what separate the boys from the men in this business anyway. This is a process that helps you hear it all better.Indeed. I'm confident you are never going to turn back. I look forward to sharing notes and being my official 2 DAW buddy.
Kind of funny that you are retiring out of the business and I am retiring in! I'm really glad you are sharing because I have been reading your posts and others for a long time, looking for a way to build a setup that can provide me the highest quality finished product and effective efficient work flow, incorporating hybrid and summing options at a price point I can live with, without having to spend my last days working myself silly to remain in "poverty"! This 2 DAW rigging sure seems to fit my bill!
I'm on a pay as I go plan with everything we have, paid for to date, not completed but paid for and at this point still maintained. I want to have fun in my retirement, engaging in a life's dream and at the same time giving back to our relatively small county (less than 70,000 people in a county of nearly 70,000 sq. mi.) . Our immediate community of about a 60 mile radius is about 6,000 people and dropping yearly.
I just want to be able to do this without the added pressure of needing to make a living solely off of the studio. I need it to remain fun, support itself and provide enough income to add to my social security benefits to live on modestly. I've used my adequate construction skills and Rod's wonderful engineering, plans and consultation since 2008 to build a modest but fabulous set of rooms. I'm about 40K away from completion, doing about 70% of the construction alone.
It's all coming together now and I look forward to having your support! You and others on this forum have done and continue to do the experimenting and spending that has already saved me so much for both. Now it's time for me to make some choices and commit, or be committed, I'm not really sure which is most appropriate right now! I'm honored to be your "2 DAW buddy". I kinda feel the same way as your friend in Bulgaria...Secret Sauce...DON"T SHARE! But as you say, it's the ears. To me that's a big topic including years of playing, listening, and working with people. Phil Ramone understood that well as so many others did, but I wonder how many do now.
Okay I'm a rambling old man and need to go. Thanks again "2 DAW" ( and all the others that contribute so much freely in this forum)!
Namaste
audiokid, post: 429321, member: 1 wrote: No worries. Its a new s
audiokid, post: 429321, member: 1 wrote: No worries. Its a new step , not something you can discuss with anyone on any forum either. I personally don't know many people who do it to this extent. I have a ME friend in Bulgaria who is now summing like this and he is hiding his system so no-one see's what he is doing. ;) There was a time I didn't want to talk about this too but I'm retiring soon and its just fun discussing it all now.
Its a great system but you still need ears. And ears are what separate the boys from the men in this business anyway. This is a process that helps you hear it all better.
That is 100% correct.The second DAW with the best AD converters is secret weapon.
Also good hardware EQ like NSEQ4 or some mastering compressor will made all diference.
If you want loud master you can drive that hardwares hard and get some good analog saturation,I also drive my PrismLyra AD converter hard and make the red light picking 1 db.
All that know how ,I learn from Chris
angel72bg, post: 429381, member: 47426 wrote: Wow, thanks for c
angel72bg, post: 429381, member: 47426 wrote:
Wow, thanks for contributing with that testimonial. I'm very excited about the 2 box concept. My Antelope Pure 2 arrived today (just unboxed it!)and I should have my computer tomorrow to complete my Box 2 construction. Then I will download Audacity to start with and use my Mix Wiz 16 to sum.
I can barely think of anything else for days now! I'm off to rack and cable!
Namaste
angel72bg, post: 429381, member: 47426 wrote: That is 100% corre
angel72bg, post: 429381, member: 47426 wrote: That is 100% correct.The second DAW with the best AD converters is secret weapon.
Also good hardware EQ like NSEQ4 or some mastering compressor will made all diference.
If you want loud master you can drive that hardwares hard and get some good analog saturation,I also drive my PrismLyra AD converter hard and make the red light picking 1 db.
All that know how ,I learn from Chris
:love:
Hi Angel,
Where have you been! Its been a long time since we last had a conversation. Thanks for the kinds words and sharing the testimonial.
vibrations1951, post: 429283, member: 34341 wrote: I 'll have to
vibrations1951, post: 429283, member: 34341 wrote: I 'll have to think more clearly about my market and needs before making a final decision about Samp. products.
I understand the reticence, I was there once myself. All I can say to you in regard to this, is that Samp was a game-changer for me.... and I didn't exactly go into Samp all that excited about it at first, either.
But after working with it for a year now, I'd never go back to PT, Sonar or any of the other platforms I've had experience with. ;)
In the end, You need to figure out what is best for you, and what best fits your workflow.
FWIW
d.
DonnyThompson, post: 429403, member: 46114 wrote: I understand t
DonnyThompson, post: 429403, member: 46114 wrote: I understand the reticence, I was there once myself. All I can say to you in regard to this, is that Samp was a game-changer for me.... and I didn't exactly go into Samp all that excited about it at first, either.
But after working with it for a year now, I'd never go back to PT, Sonar or any of the other platforms I've had experience with. ;)
In the end, You need to figure out what is best for you, and what best fits your workflow.
FWIW
d.
Yes Donny it is hard. Either way, I have time because I don't have the bucks at this point (who ever does right?). I started with Nuendo in 2006 or so on the recommendation of an engineer I trusted as I was mostly in the dark about this then. I told him that my market would have a demand for post production as well so it made sense. It's the only program I have experience with and it has been a steep learning curve for many reasons. With nothing to compare to hands on of course, I'm very pleased with the results and glad I dodged the PT bullet.
The biggest challenge has been that I haven't been able to do this as much as I want between house/studio construction, day as well as private practice and keeping up doing sound reinforcement and playing out with our band, mostly for fun. I hope it doesn't sound like I'm whining because I knew from the start what a long ride this would be. Best part is it's getting close now!
The number of others around here to swap info with is almost non existent and because of market share, folks play their cards close to their chests if ya get my drift! Cordial but wary, so this forum and people like you are vital to me and I depend a lot upon what I read. That said, you are 100% right about finding out what works best for me. I spend a lot of time reading forums, articles, manufacturer's hype, drawing out scenarios on paper and in my head, but in the end, there's nothing like diving into the deep end!
Thanks again for your honest input. It means a lot. I'm hoping that having a fair amount of experience with the Nuendo/Steinburg Products platform will carry over to adapting to a new one. From what I can tell, there are some basics that are always the same...but different....if you know what I mean.
In the end I'll have to see for myself if this becomes too overwhelming managing between 2 boxes with differing DAWS and I need to make a choice between all Magix or all Steinburg or other???
Any thoughts about this??? How about others who have or are working between multiple platforms at once? Hmmmm,I guess I should do a search on this. later
Namaste
vibrations1951, post: 429409, member: 34341 wrote: How about oth
vibrations1951, post: 429409, member: 34341 wrote: How about others who have or are working between multiple platforms at once? Hmmmm,I guess I should do a search on this.
This is something you really need to talk about with Chris, and trust his knowledge on, because he's done quite a bit of scenario experimentation. He's definitely the guy to talk to about this.
vibrations1951, post: 429409, member: 34341 wrote: I started with Nuendo in 2006 or so on the recommendation of an engineer I trusted as I was mostly in the dark about this then. I told him that my market would have a demand for post production as well so it made sense. It's the only program I have experience with and it has been a steep learning curve for many reasons.
I won't lie to you, there is a learning curve to Samplitude that some might find steeper than others... but the good news is that there are some really great instructional vids dedicated to every facet of Samp and Sequoia.
But, ya know, any program that you are unfamiliar with, is gonna take some time to get comfortable with, especially programs such as Samp, which are so powerful and which can do so many things.
I finally started doing research on Samp "how-to's" through various online video instruction, and throughout my internet travels, I found that there are two sources, both whom I not only trust implicitly, but both of whom who also have a wealth of knowledge, and the ability to explain things in ways that are intuitive, yet easy to grasp.
These two people are Kraznet Montpelier and Tim Dolbear. As you may know, Tim, (who is also a member of RO), works for Magix as the North Amercian Sales Rep. He is also a musician, engineer and producer, and, a Samplitude /Sequoia user himself, who like may of us here, also has extensive past experience with other DAW Platforms.
Kraznet - who does not work for Magix - is perhaps the most knowledgeable person I've found in regard to "all things Samp/Sequoia". His videos are awesome. I've yet to come across any issue or question he hasn't been able to successfully answer and help me tp overcome, as well as providing info on things that I didn't know I even had questions about, LOL, but that still benefited me greatly. His Youtube videos are - as far as I'm concerned - the "de facto" standard for Samp knowledge, tricks, tips, tools and suggestions.
If you do end up trying out Samp, make sure to take advantage of these two guy's instructional vids. Truth be told, I think I'd probably be standing helpless out in the tall grass without them. ;)
Once you start to get a handle on how powerful this platform is, and what just what it's capable of, ( as well as working with honest audio... their audio engine is incredibly accurate), you'll look back and wonder why you didn't make the move sooner.
For modern production, (or even retro styles) as far as I'm concerned - and having had a lot of experience in both PT and Sonar - I can honestly say that IMO, there is no better platform, no equal.
This is not a platform for the hobbyist, or the person who just likes to mess around with recording and mixing. This is a professional DAW Program, and, because of this, it can be complex at times... but nothing you can't overcome if you look at the videos I've mentioned and talk to other Samp users here.
(And no, I don't work for Magix, either.) ;)
FWIW
d.
audiokid, post: 429161, member: 1 wrote: Where Bos stops, I add
So the only big difference between your way and Bos is your monitoring gear as well as higher quality tweaking available in the 2-bus capture DAW??
You are both uncoupling, summing analog and using 2 DAWS with no round trips right?
I want to be able to record and mix as finished a product as I can because my guess is my market will not be willing or able to put the extra dollars into a real ME. I'd rather have them spend their limited dollars with me. I hope that doesn't sound too pompous or greedy! I think this is very practical in my market and would work best for my clients as well.
So your system sounds like a good fit for me and my purposes. If my clients want further polish, they could then spend the extra and get an ME on board, and I would be happy to help them. I just think many would be happy enough with what I could produce here. If I can produce a high quality product with less, this means I can get off the ground sooner, and I'm not getting any younger!
I have a 2-LA-2 and a few decent pres and a gate for hardware. I am dazzled by hardware and lust for racks full of analog gear but I just don't see that ever being possible in my future. But I'm not about to let that stop me from reaching my dream in the best way I can within my limits. I know my biggest asset will be how good a technician I can be and want to settle on an efficient and quality workflow with analog summing and hybrid potentials so I can focus upon improving my chops.
Once I know my costs involved in a computer I'll have a better idea of what amount I can and should spend on what I need so that I can try this system out for myself to see if is right for me ( I strongly suspect it is). I see your points about Samplitude and a quality ADC (as well as the monitoring and summing components) but I am not be able to go to that quality level at the moment. I may have to go with something like Audacity for now and put my dollars into a quality ADC I could use into the future and replace and build from there.
So many unknowns and I hope you hang in there with me in my process. I think I am starting to understand more with help from you, Bos and Donny so please keep chiming in. I should have the computer thing sorted out soon and I'll report back.
namaste