enter steve slate......oh wait he isn't on here...good. Back to the topic, people can work however they want to work, but saying that since a gold record is made ITB makes OTB recording obsolete is not true. I know a fat kid who dates hot chicks, doesn't mean all fat dudes date hot chicks, he just has charisma.

Never said it was obsolete. Many pros do still work that way. My argument was that the overwhelming majority don't and that the new format of the forums (check the heading for the Pro Audio Forums) was implying certain things that just aren't true; as if this forums' view is that pros only use hybrid OTB setups.

Hope I made myself clearer.

Cheers :)

Excellent points. I was hoping we would get some static over this. I share your POV but its not realistic to continue trying to keep both forums together. If you noticed, we have a DAW Pro Audio forum as well and this section is taking preference here now. 100% DAW studios are the most popular.

I think its fare to say that up until only a few years ago, Pro Audio clearly meant hardware so I think its you that hasn't come to terms with what's happened or happening to our pro audio industry. We need to cut a line here and its now done. Its not about who is better. I know you can produce solid music all ITB. But, Pro Audio Gear is hardware . I think all the engineers that participated in these forums shared this opinion.

How I see it, Hybrid is the new Pro Audio or the end of an era. How ever it pans out, we simply cannot keep the two area's ITB and hybrid together anymore. The Pro Recording forum was simply renamed to hybrid recording.

DAW, 100% plug-in studio are not hybrid so a division has to be made and I'm doing it now rather than a year from now when people start waking up..

Hybrid is a combination of plug-ins and hardware.
The DAW crowd however, has no interest in hybrid (summing OTB) and keeps trying to convince the pro audio world that their DAW systems (Mixing ITB) are equal or better. I don't think the hybrid crowd cares to keep listening to this nor do the DAW crowd either so its time to make some changed and define things better.

DAW users are in a constant battle over who is better and this is getting stupid. Its not about that.

Hybrid is "pro audio" because it continues to support boutique pro audio products which I am a big supporter for!
DAW studios ( summing ITB) do not use pro audio gear so the two need to be seperated.

This separation and new layout is not about who is better, it is about content and where it belongs. Much like grouping the stems. :)

My OTB starts w/ the performers/instruments. Mics apply. Moves into any cool effects. I use basic realtime dsp efx.

ITB should be called what it is.....software.
The term "Pro Audio" has traditionally been used to refer to audio electronics (hardware) manufactured to professional standards. The difference in consumer and pro grade was merely a difference in quality, components and design specs.

Now interfaces (A/D & D/A) are electronic hardware but could really be considered nothing more than "peripherals" to a computer system like mice, keyboard and display. So technically speaking they really aren't "audio devices", they are "transducers" or "converters". Just like microphones or speakers.

Amplifiers, EQ's, preamps, compressors/limiters, speakers, mixers are audio devices.
So technically everyone really uses a "hybrid" setup if you at the very least use speakers and amps.

Just thought maybe everyone should get a grip on the terms being thrown around.

Maybe we need to define what a Hybrid DAW system is and/or let the manufacturers know they have it all wrong.
Hybrid its a gray area but the term hybrid DAW systems to me does not include mics, converters, pre amps etc as Don made clear. The Term Hybrid to me is referred to POST, what you do after the recording and specifically ( Mixing OTB) with a analog summing system that is designed to work with a DAW.

If we or I have it wrong, that would mean we should merge ALL the digital and analog FORMS ( past to present) into one forum and call it a day. And let the software and hardware users fight it out. Over and over and over.

But what about all the people that want to talk about analog gear that have to listen to all the distraction and noise about how hardware is a waste of money and that ITB sounds so much clearer and better with these third party plug-ins..
The two worlds are not the same to me and you cannot know this until you are using a professionally equipped DA recording system that has high end hardware and great converters. The kind of hardware that the Pro Audio world has been talking about for 50 + years. Thus, where the term Pro Audio arrived from.

I personally think the DAW generation ( ITB crowd) has a problem coming to terms with all this. They want to be included and feel they are entitled. I've been trying to set the record straight for a long time. There is a lot of animosity towards OTB. A lot of people think software is just as good but every 18 months more software comes out claiming it is better. Well, an LA-2A has been what it is for years and the plugin looks the same but it does not sound the same. Is it better, this is not the point. Its designed to fit in a rack.

Hybrid = DA (hardware) AD
Pro Audio does not mean you are or are not a Pro. It is a level of gear that the "Pro" considers to be high end. Thus Pro Audio Dealers. Pro Audio Boutique Manufacturers.

Question:
I've been trying to define High End as well. Is there high end in the ITB world?

I suppose we could call Sequoia high end software.
Is Pro Tools high end? Is Sonar or Cubase high end?

What do pro's use for recording software? The same stuff that the kids use, yes?

So, what does pro audio really mean?

smoke

I think it comes down to analog versus digital and that is the easiest separation you can make.
It doesn't matter pre or post becasue people use preamps and compressors/limiters going in as well as post in the mix.
And then there are the analog mixer/consoles that do a lot of analog up front and then process everything digitally.
Those are considered hybrid systems as well.

Not sure where this is all going though, no matter how you slice it up, there will still be people thinking they are pros.
There will still be ITB OTB debates...
One thing for sure....true analog audio equipment is limited in what it can do....now and in the future. That's why they all have digital add on's or enhancements now.
Digital audio equipment doesn't have that problem and there's no telling how far they will go.
One thing for certain....digital systems and software programming only mimic what already exists in the real world.
That's really all they do....computers don't "create" anything new.
They are merely time machines that can slow down mimic and manipulate the real analog world.
How "real" they can do that is all part of the coding.

Hybrid explained:

To my understanding: only when you are going out of the box to further process something that has been recorded ITB is when hybrid technically occurs. It is the integration of hardware OTB.

When we talk about running a ‘hybrid studio’, it’s really this mix-oriented system that we have in mind: a setup where the DAW software remains the central hub of the studio, but the hardware and software is configured in such a way that you can simply patch in hardware to add a little character

Hybrid is not:
Example: Microphone> preamp> compressor, processing > AD.

Hybrid is not:

Mic> Console> EQ> compression etc > AD.

Hybrid DAW = AD>DA>AD and as close to a straight line up until you add addition hardware.

This is not hybrid. :confused:

kmetal, post: 388759 wrote: My OTB starts w/ the performers/instruments. Mics apply. Moves into any cool effects. I use basic realtime dsp efx.

This is a Hybrid DAW System:

See Page 7 to fully understand the routing of a Pro Hybrid DAW system:
http://spl.info/fileadmin/user_upload/produkte/mixdream/mixdream_2384_manual.pdf

Watch this to fully understand a professional Hybrid DAW system ( full version highly recommended!):
http://www.puremix.net/video/mixing/pop/hybrid-digital-analog-mixing.html?affid=53M0N3X8QL

Watch this for a briefing of a professional Hybrid DAW system.

Mo Facta, post: 388754 wrote: My argument was that the overwhelming majority don't and that the new format of the forums (check the heading for the Pro Audio Forums) was implying certain things that just aren't true; as if this forums' view is that pros only use hybrid OTB setups.

Hope I made myself clearer.

Cheers :)

No, you are incorrect:

Both forums have "Pro" mentioned. I simply fine tuned the Pro Audio Forums, which I do every few years. Most people using pro audio hardware now have some kind of hybrid DAW system.

It was time to add Hybrid into the older and evolving Pro Recording Forums, which I originally created for the R.A.P. crowd ( pre Alsihad era 3 years before gearslutz was created). 1999/2000
A lot of people in this business do not understand the difference between hybrid, OTB or ITB and how a console is, IMHO, different from a Hybrid summing system. Hybrid is the closest OTB processing to a staight line where a console adds more of everything including (IMHO) a less effective monitoring for mixing OTB.

Our "DAW" Pro Audio Forums have been active for 4+ years and needing to be merged with the Mixing ITB Forums. Thus, completly taken out of the Pro Audio Forums entirely. To much conflict and a different way to sum and mix.

Our Pro Audio Forums have been active for 13 years. These forums include Pro Audio Gear and hybrid recording methods. This forum has thousands of threads about analog processing, recording to tape and mixing OTB. Updating it the Hybrid was needed IMO.

Before "DAW world" came along, the high end recording industry has always been referred to as Pro Audio. Just because you use, Pro Tools HD as an example, this does not make anyone more pro or not a pro. We know most people using Pro Tools are mixing ITB and do not use external hardware to go OTB and sum. They use plug-ins and stay ITB. So, this is where DAW Pro Audio is and all the topic related need to be.

So we logically have DAW Pro Audio and Pro Audio Forums.

Make sense?
If you do not mix OTB you are not anywhere near a professional hybrid DAW system.

Isn't using a DA needed in both?
So wouldn't that create a conflict in your definition?

You source from the DAW and run that through an outboard analog piece of gear and print it back into the DAW?
Your still using A/D and D/A and software.

ITB uses A/D going in and D/A to monitor out!
Also what about hybrid mixers (i.e. ZEDR16 or Mackie or higher end consoles) that are analog isn't that considered hybrid?

djmukilteo, post: 388815 wrote: Isn't using a DA needed in both?
So wouldn't that create a conflict in your definition?

I suppose you need the DA to monitor but I would not call that hybrid. Every kid on the block is doing this.

djmukilteo, post: 388815 wrote:
Also what about hybrid mixers (i.e. ZEDR16 or Mackie or higher end consoles) that are analog isn't that considered hybrid?

A mixer could be called a hybrid console but I call that Mixing OTB. Hybrid rigs are more a straight analog line. Not until the audio ( not headphones) has been digitized and DA > (back to analog) via a bus/ insert/ summing system would I call it a hybrid process. Headphone and monitoring are not hybrid if you are in a pro Audio headspace. Thus, why we need to get Pro Audio out of the DAW Pro Audio category and in its own space. Generally speaking for our readers, like it or not, Mixing OTB is a whole added level beyond a DAW system, and I for one, want our topics to stay on track. I'm not at all interested in debates over plug-ins in a analog discussion.

No doubt, there are a lot of people confused with the term pro audio. We have Pro Tools to thank for that. Literally, pro means you make money at it. And we know a lot of people are making money ITB.
People who bought a Pro Tools HD system do not have a Pro Audio tracking system to me though and hate me for saying that all you want. They have nice DAW system that can run a lot more plug-ins than the average DAW. Flame away!

Does a Pro Tools HD system sound any better than the $150.00 Reaper and a quality converter? I don't think so!

And for added fun rant,

There is a lot of BS and dilutions of grandeur floating and around over what does sounds better. My ears say Hybrid takes the generic DAW to a different level. Many argue that gear doesn't make a difference, but it does if you are mixing OTB and following the steps of people who are successful at it.

Hmm,
Do plug-ins make a sonic difference?

On the ZEDR16 (which I am only familiar with) you have analog preamps, analog EQ and analog mixing (summing?).

When you track your going through an analog audio preamp which can be routed through an analog EQ section as well as optional external analog devices via insert which is then converted to digital and recorded into your DAW.
This process is more analog than digital, because the only thing that is digital is conversion and recording.

At mixdown the digital source track leaves the DAW, the console converts the digital info back into analog and the channel strip again can be used to process in the analog domain and be mixed (summed?) to a 2 track master which could be converted back into digital again if desired and printed back into the DAW.

IMHO...there's not much difference in those two processes that are more "hybrid" than the other.
In my mind they are both hybrid processes. And to me they are both more analog than digital.

For that matter I could still use software or virtual plugin modules within the DAW source track and still process that track in a mix ITB (digtally using math) and/or OTB using strictly analog devices and still be considered "hybrid".
I think that's where the blurring of these terms comes into play.
Most of the desention comes from a misunderstanding of what ITB really is and can do....it's virtual...it's not real.

ITB still has to capture the audio track analog and still has to monitor the audio track analog....there's no way around that!....hence ITB can never be strictly all digital or all analog...it is hybrid.
The software people haven't managed to figure that part out yet....and they never will. The real world is analog and that all it will ever be.

So at the end of the day ITB as a term is just a transitory interim digital process in between the two ends of the real world which analog.

djmukilteo, post: 388823 wrote: On the ZEDR16 (which I am only familiar with) you have analog preamps, analog EQ and analog mixing (summing?).

When you track your going through an analog audio preamp which can be routed through an analog EQ section as well as optional external analog devices via insert which is then converted to digital and recorded into your DAW.
This process is more analog than digital, because the only thing that is digital is conversion and recording.

At mixdown the digital source track leaves the DAW, the console converts the digital info back into analog and the channel strip again can be used to process in the analog domain and be mixed (summed?) to a 2 track master which could be converted back into digital again if desired and printed back into the DAW.

IMHO...there's not much difference in those two processes that are more "hybrid" than the other.
In my mind they are both hybrid processes. And to me they are both more analog than digital.

For that matter I could still use software or virtual plugin modules within the DAW source track and still process that track in a mix ITB (digtally using math) and/or OTB using strictly analog devices and still be considered "hybrid".
I think that's where the blurring of these terms comes into play.
Most of the desention comes from a misunderstanding of what ITB really is and can do....it's virtual...it's not real.

ITB still has to capture the audio track analog and still has to monitor the audio track analog....there's no way around that!....hence ITB can never be strictly all digital or all analog...it is hybrid.
The software people haven't managed to figure that part out yet....and they never will. The real world is analog and that all it will ever be.

So at the end of the day ITB as a term is just a transitory interim digital process in between the two ends of the real world which analog.

thumb

I'm with you until the headphones.

This is of course just my opinion. Our music world is changing , methods are evolving and disappearing. Technically the headphone mix DA is a hybrid process or listening to an analog monitor mix is a hybrid process but its not very Pro Audio. Thus, why I needed to get the two worlds separated.

This came to mind: This is a mixer [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.mackie.c…"]Mackie - Onyx 820i[/]="http://www.mackie.c…"]Mackie - Onyx 820i[/] and this is a Mixer:
Which one is Pro Audio?

More examples: I agree you can make make a hit song on the Mackie and they both use electricity. There are a lot of people who think its all the same and it comes down to the engineer. But gear does have an impact and/or influence sound. So, saying its all hybrid, yes, but there is a point where pro audio and DAWworld need to part because its simply ridiculous not moving past the basics.

Which one of these is Pro Audio?

IMHO, Neither .

I suppose both are Pro Audio Software up until you prove they both sound the same as Garageband, Logic, Reaper, Audition, Sonar, FL, Samplitude, Pro Tools etc. What separates Pro Audio from Consumer? Well in an analog recording world where we use microphones to capture sound, its starts with the Mics, preamps, converters. Pro Audio Gear.

This is where I'm having a big problem believing anything to do with software (ITB) is Pro Audio anymore. Its either more advanced software or very limited but it isn't Pro Audio to me but what else do we call it? If we are making money as a professional, I guess its DAW Pro Audio.
Pro Audio is high end recording gear designed by the boutique pro audio manufacturers to work with DAW or analog systems. Hybrid recording uses both in a more refined and straight line. I'm sure we can argue over the particulars but this is how I see it. We shouldn't take pro so literally and get defensive over the term. If people are getting all choked up over the word "Pro", they need to do some history on this and get a life.

Whether one sounds better than the other, this is beside the point. Pro Audio was called Pro Audio because it was used by professional in this industry long before the DAW came into this business. Pro Audio has earned its place.

Pro Audio = gear and IMO, high end boutique recording gear.
DAW = Digital Audio Workstation (software).
Hybrid = gear and software and to be more presice, no console and all the extra crap.

If you do not use hardware, you are not hybrid, you are a DAW, period. If you use High End Pro Audio gear with a hybrid System, I would call this a Hybrid Pro Audio DAW. But I think an actual hybrid DAW system is more than just monitoring to be considered an official Hybrid DAW system.

For all our readers:

Search for information on monitoring with a hybrid systems. They are designed to work with a hybrid summing system. Big difference from just a monitor out.

The DAW Forum categories have officially been reorganized for Mixing ITB. I think this is a good move. Time will tell of course. Thanks for your input guys and thanks for putting up with me.

I think you have it all covered then.

There are different levels of ITB, OTB and Hybrid.
Each can have "Pro Audio" levels.

Those levels can be easily defined.

Headphones are still analog.
I'm still waiting for digital speakers..
I'm still waiting for flying cars too..

djmukilteo, post: 388834 wrote: I think you have it all covered then.

There are different levels of ITB, OTB and Hybrid.
Each can have "Pro Audio" levels.

Those levels can be easily defined.

Headphones are still analog.
I'm still waiting for digital speakers..
I'm still waiting for flying cars too..

Right on, thanks!

Re digital speakers: I'm not sure I would want them because they are only as good as the DA. That technology is changing all the time.

I had a choice with my Neumann KH120. ( still not available after a year) And there are others. But as soon as we fall for that, you know you are at the mercy of the conversion. I think we go backwards there.
Traveling like the Jetsons has always been top on my wishlist too!

audiokid, post: 388835 wrote: Right on, thanks!

Re digital speakers: I'm not sure I would want them because they are only as good as the DA. That technology is changing all the time.

I had a choice with my Neumann KH120. ( still not available after a year) And there are others. But as soon as we fall for that, you know you are at the mercy of the conversion. I think we go backwards there.
Traveling like the Jetsons has always been top on my wishlist too!

I guess I was trying to point out that you really can't have "digital" speakers because there's no way to replace a moving coil that responds to air pressure.
This is true for either the front end (microphone) or back end (speaker).
Not possible unless there is some electrostatic mechanism that can convert bits directly into air movement.
The closest technical item we have currently would be built in DA where you could feed digital data into a speaker enclosure and it would convert the data to analog movement of the voice coil. Same thing with these new microphones where you have built in AD stage within the capsule which outputs digital data. It's still analog.

In all of these discussions where people want to talk about digital versus analog it still comes down to the analog real world. So I still question the real reason we alter true analog signal path with digital processing.

Of course there are some great reasons where digital works like editing and capture.
The rest is real world mimic.

Sorry I'm a bit late. Had internet troubles.

Fair points by all but I still take issue with a couple things.

My overall point is that being "pro" has NOTHING to do with gear whatsoever. With audiokid's POV there seems to be two paradigms: What constitutes pro audio gear (which is fair enough) and what constitutes a professional audio engineer. I just have no distinction between the two because a professional uses whatever gear is 1. available at his disposal, and 2. gets the job done.

It's amazing how much tonal variation you can get from a budget microphone if you know where to place it.

Anyway, FWIW, I am not really interested in debating the merits or demerits of gear or whether it is "pro audio" or not but rather what constitutes being a professional. To the average person, or even the average musician, it ALL might look like pro audio because they, more than likely, have seen nothing but computers to record and produce music for the last ten years. It's all dependent on your point of view and from what I've gathered on this forum, there seems to be a move towards to making this distinction and I have to ask myself whether it's to satisfy our need to protect the craft from - for lack of a better word - punters. Quite simply put, do I want to feel like a big important audio professional using pro audio hybrid gear, or do I want to feel like a Joe-everyman working entirely ITB? What feels more important to me?

Regardless of what you use to get the job done, it's the results that count and if you know what plugins to use, or - if you're recording - what front end to use, there should be no distinction.

It's easy to feel like our craft is being encroached upon by hacks and hobbyists (no offense to them) but novices will never be able to get results professionals do without the hard labour of trial, error, and years of experience. If they can they're a prodigy and more power to them, imo.

I just want to go back to my original point. This is the heading I took issue with under the Pro Audio Forums (although it looks like it's changed a little now?):
- MIXING OTB - High End Recording & Mastering Studio Forums - Analog & Hybrid Sound Engineering Electronics & Acoustics. (war against inferior audio)

The fact that it says "Pro Audio Forums" and then goes on to state "MIXING OTB" links the two together immediately as if mixing this way is what makes you a "pro". That's just the way I took it. Granted, audiokid has shed some light on the topic and I see his thinking behind it, but my question is why he feels the need to propagate a "war"? The war is in the results, IMO. Produce a better mix and you have won the battle, as far as I see it. No need to make distinctions whatsoever.

I think I have made my points clear enough.

Cheers :)

No worries, your opinion is appreciated. However, I think there is an age gap and, you are from another country where the word "Pro" refers to status and ability. In the recording industry, "pro audio" refers to gear, not computers , software and gaming including ITB MIXING. You really need to do a search on Pro Audio and talk to some Pro Audio engineers and dealers that go back more than a decade.
I'm not going to try and change 60 years of recording history because you think its not politically correct today for fear I'm going to hurt someones feeling because they cannot see it for what it is, or are just walking into the party. Our analog based forum and industry has been called Pro Audio here for over a decade and I'm not going to change it or turn against my brother for the sake of not offending the DAW or software crowd because Pro sounds too arrogant, intimidating or politically incorrect. We've been following Pro Tools too long lol.. Look at all the newbies using that system that aren't "pros".

But, I've said this over and over, we do have a DAW Pro Audio forum http://recording.org/forums/digital-audio.21/ that is in the MIXING ITB category already covered. It has been called that for years too. Not sure what the "real "problem is here. Are we talking music or politics here? Sounds like politics.

I'm not sure how to take your comments any other way or how to say it much clearer or be much more diplomatic than I have. You seem to have a problem with me or anyone wanting "to wage war against the tyranny of inferior audio through the empowerment of the people". This is where RO is going and the brothers in arms that are wanting to see our high end Pro Audio recording industry continue. I fully support the boutique Pro Audio Industry and love it to death. I hope you are with us somewhere in the middle, like I am, thus why I choose Hybrid over being stuck ITB. Its neither ALL ITB or OTB. Its where "Pro Audio " is going IMO and I'm leaning that way for great sonic reason.

A better world we go albeit our flavour of choice> DAW Pro Audio, Pro Audio, Hybrid or straight analog on vinyl, but please leave the politics to politicians.

The distinction of forum categories is to keep the level of conversation focused, intelligent and SEO/user targeted. We also never blend groups all together like you suggest because it destroys passion and expertise. All forums are a simple click of a mouse away.

You need to get over it.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=Pro+Audio&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_audio

Cheers!

I see where you're coming from, believe me audiokid. I totally get it. I meant no hostility towards you or anyone else on here.

I don't intend on requesting a change to the status quo for the definition of "Pro Audio" either. It's just that things have changed and it's obvious. A whole lot more constitutes Professional Audio than ever: computers, IT, networking, digital audio technology (and the devils that come with it), plugins, and a whole lot more that was absorbed into the craft over the last 60 years. And I'm not just talking about in studio technology either. In live sound we have line arrays, configuration software, Class-D amps, digital mixers as far as the eye can see, and many more innovations that just weren't there in the past and they are used in the vast majority of shows these days. This, IMO, is all "Pro Audio". It doesn't have to have a 60 year old heritage in order for it to be useful and to get the job done and that doesn't mean the 60 year old traditional stuff is any less useful, either.

Anyway, my beef - to call it such - is merely what the heading to the Pro Audio forums implies; that pro audio is hybrid mixing in OTB. In my book, the Icon and Pro Tools (the most widely found "Pro Audio" system) is proof enough of falacy. I just found the heading weird and ventured to discuss it. I apologise if I offended in any way.

As always the engineer with experience and golden ears with the minimum tools can make you a golden record! An engineer with a ITB solution with thousands of plugins and the best converters and Tons of gear and a OTB solution but with crap ears, acoustics, and no experience can do the worst of your nightmares!
It's all about your ears, acoustics and experience using the stuff you got and knowing your environment!

Maybe you should get rid of the whole Pro Audio stuff all together.

ITB Stuff....all things digital
OTB Stuff...all things analog
Hybrid Stuff....all things that blend analog and digital
Boutique Stuff....everything else that's quirky and analog

As an example of some, Boutique Pro Audio Manufacturers :

(AccuSound Cables, ADAM Studio Monitors, Alta Moda Audio, AMTEC, AEA Microphones, Alan Smart Compressors, AMI Tab Funkenwerk, API, Apogee, Avalon Design, Avenson Audio, Brauner Microphones, Chandler Limited, Coleman Audio, Coles Microphones, Crane Song, Crowley and Tripp, Dangerous Music, Dramastic Audio, Drawmer, DWFearn, Empirical Labs, Esoteric Audio Research, FMR Audio, Focal Monitors, Funk Logic, George Massenburg Labs, Great River, Groove Tubes, Horch, iZ Technology - RADAR , John Hardy, Josephson Microphones, LaChapell Audio, Langevin, Latch Lake Mic Stands, Lavry Engineering, Little Labs, Lynx, Manley Labs, Martech MSS-10, MoreMe Headphones, Microtech Gefell, Neve, Palmer, Pendulum Audio, Portico, PrismSound, Purple Audio, Radial, Roll Music Studios (RMS), Royer Labs, Smart Research, Speck Electronics, SPL Electronics, Tab/Funkenwerk, Telefunken, THD Electronics, T.H.E. Audio, Thermionic Culture, Toft Audio Designs, Telefunken, Vintage Design, Weiss Engineering

and more...

These all all part of the Pro Audio industry. Big step away from software and MIXING ITB. Monitoring and converters are of course staples of the recording process.

What about these cables?....are these boutique Pro Audio?

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.audiovis…"]Hi Fi Home Theater San Francisco High End Electronics AV Projectors Highend Speaker Systems Loudspeaker System[/]="http://www.audiovis…"]Hi Fi Home Theater San Francisco High End Electronics AV Projectors Highend Speaker Systems Loudspeaker System[/]

Not sure where you are going with this Don? That looks like HD speaker cable idea for Pro Audio or the Audio Files. Does that company also make db25 cable, single or snakes that hook up to our converters, patchbays or summing boxes? If so, yes, I would include them in the Pro Audio category. ITB category does not use high end gear and need DB25 cable. 99.9% most likely don't even use great monitoring systems. If they did, they would most likely be interested in hybrid and want to spend more time learning stuff from people that strive for better sound.

I can just imagine the level of conversion evolving trying to convince the "general" DAW crowd that an LA-2A is going to make a difference in their mixes! ) And wouldn't that serve the makers of high end gear well, facepalm allowing a bunch of opinions from people who will never reach any further than software, run out of control in the same thread with hardware designers and users. How does this serve anyone well.

you guys are pushing a gray world to me.

Sorry, I'm done on this topic. Its so obvious to me.

No it was just something I came across....I don't know if you saw the price list.
Those were $35,000 cables for your turntable!
But it occured to me that "ProAudio" can be all relative to some degree or another to hype.
There are people out there that believe this is ProAudio.
And it just shows how diverse opinions and beliefs can be and how important it is to take marketing with a grain of salt.
As we all know an SM57 mic is absolutely ProAudio used in the right hands with the right talent and ability!

Pro Audio and High Fidelity is another category. Often a Pro Audio distributor will handle both lines but they are definitely different. Audio Files are the top of the chain in sound demand IMO.
If I was going to put a number on sound quality , the golden ears. HD products would be the top and DAW would be at the bottom. Then their is earbud and all that crowd. Hybrid is in the middle. Most sense.

Software and computers are inexpensive. Anyone can now afford them.

Think about the price of a 24 track 2" tape deck.
Think about the price of any DAW. It's a direct replacement.

Think about the price of 24 pieces of outboard hardware.
Think about the price of a plugin bundle. It's a direct replacement.

And so it goes, mixing consoles, monitors, mics...there is something for everyone.
Is it "pro"....pretty darn close.

We know that only professionals can afford those expensive hardware equivalents.
But we want to buy stuff like that which mimics that stuff we can afford.
And we want to think the sound quality is just as good.
At some level it can be just as good...sometimes it can even exceed older analog equipment.

So IMHO the whole "ProAudio" term could be dropped.
It doesn't need to be used as an exclusionary term.

That's why I suggested....ITB, OTB, Hybrid, Boutique or even HiFi which might be a friendlier less intimidating and exclusionary list of categories.
When you think about it why is the "Pro" part even necessary...

Oh I know, but this is a term that has been in the industry long before you and I got into it. Its also indexed as a term in the recording industry. Its part of SEO as well. Pro audio gear dealers, dictionary, search engines, recording companies. Its part of the analog culture.

Okay, I'll change it. It makes sense to change it to MIXING OTB and use Pro Audio in the description. Doing it now. smoke

That makes a lot of sense. I like it!
Mixing ITB
Mixing OTB
Simple and straightforward.
Mixing ITB covers a lot of ground!

Thanks for your help everyone!

Mo Facta, post: 388754 wrote: Never said it was obsolete. Many pros do still work that way. My argument was that the overwhelming majority don't and that the new format of the forums (check the heading for the Pro Audio Forums) was implying certain things that just aren't true; as if this forums' view is that pros only use hybrid OTB setups.

Hope I made myself clearer.

Cheers :)

I seriously think this is more due to the fact that we are in a recession and ITB is feasible in comparison to the real deal, plus, the DAW industry is a serious money maker so why wouldn't it be just as good, if not better, or work. Plus its not really about sound quality. Its about what it all does and how easy it is to make a recording.

The best thing about ITB, everyone with a computer can have a the exact same DAW, same sound and same professional plug-ins as some guy who's been making hit records for 3 decades now, What a wonderful world! And the best part, for less than 5 grand.
Who needs a mastering engineer anymore too. CD's are dead. The only thing to worry about in mastering is get it equal level to everyone else, and thats not too hard with leveling plug-ins.

Plug-ins sound just as good, if not better than vintage gear or hardware from what I've read, I know this because I read it on gearslutz. And I have a DAW with plug-ins and it sounds great! Everyone using a DAW agree's. Even people that don't record agree. Just do the math they say.

And if I was a starving engineer who lost my vintage studio, and couldn't afford to replace my hardware and the space its required to store it all, I could buy a DAW system and a bundle of plug-ins, set up in a smaller space and convince my clients that its just as good as hardware anyway. Digital is so clean. Eventually no one will know the difference anyway and all it will come down to is experience. Gear / tools don't matter., I read that too. Are plug-ins gear? hmm, I'm a bit confused on that one but anyway...
Lets give a thanks to all the boutique pro audio manufacturers and dealers who gave us all those years. I suppose the smart who can ones will join the DAW generation and find someone that can make a plug-in close enough to their vintage gear that works with Avid products. Thank goodness we all have Avid. Where would the music business be without them.

That pretty much sums it up.

I'm glad we had this discussion. Thanks for all the open minds and for taking my remarks with your stride.

Cheers :)

Ps. I approve of the new format!