Musically, reminds me of Steely Dan. very cool! Your vocal does not sound operatic at all. You are covering that up very well.
About the only thing I would critique is the kick drum is a bit to dominating for me (sounds like a drum machine). A slight more reverb on it and take off about 2 db around 2.5k to 4k and I would love the mix. Just so it doesn't stand out there so much.

Nice.

Please share your gear list and some of your mixing tricks on this track?

Hi audiokid!

Thanks for the compliments!

Your points about the kick drum and the slightly sharp highs is spot on—and I'm aware of them. I noticed when I played a version of the mix I liked on my hifi, that the treble is way too sharp to the ears. Regarding the kick drum, yeah, in this version I tried to boost the lower frequencies a bit more because when I compared it to my reference track ([[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.youtube…"]Incognito's "Will I Ever Learn"[/]="http://www.youtube…"]Incognito's "Will I Ever Learn"[/]) the bass sounded way too thin, particularly the bass guitar. In the Incognito track the bass guitar sounds very lush and liquid but not at all overpowering and I tried to somehow get closer to that sound. Of course, I didn't record a $7000 bass in a top-notch studio so I know some things are impossible to achieve just working with computer-based sounds and synths, but I try to get as close as I can. So what I did was take the worst treble peaks off (but not enough!) with the L3-16 and boost the bass with MaxxBass, but admittedly I didn't fiddle around with the settings too much—and evidently not enough. Maybe that's the right way to go, that is, to use the L3-16 to try to tame the kick? Or I could go back and fix it in the mix, .i.e. just work on the bass guitar and kick drum sounds individually, before making (yet another) master. And while I'm at it, take the high frequencies down even more. Regarding the cymbal sounds, maybe too much cutting in the low end is what's making them sound too sharp to the ears? I've read that there's not much sonic information in cymbals below, say, 200Hz, but cutting too much leaves too much treble?

Regarding the gear list, it's there in my profile, but I guess it's easier to just post it here as well:
iMac 3.6 GHz Intel Core i5 12GB RAM, OSX 10.6.8, RME Babyface interface, Genelec 6020A monitors, Novation SL 49 mkII controller keyboard, TSM MT87S mkII and AKG C2000B mics, Charvel and Ibanez guitars, Beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro headphones, loads of Waves and other plugins.
DAW is Logic Pro 8.0.2 and Reason 5.0 as slave for sounds and synths.

The only thing I haven't used on this track is the the AKG mic.

Mixing tricks...

I suppose I went about the whole thing pretty much the standard way. Cutting the sub bass in most tracks, brightening up the dullness of the vocal recording, panning the rhythm guitars left-right, but not all the way. Actually, I had to work a lot on the vocals, because at the time I recorded it I had no SE Electronics X1 Reflexion Filter and no mic stand, which means I held the TSM mic in my hand sitting right in front of the computer! Consequently, there was a lot of noise and rumble coming from the computer and my handling the mic. I thought about recording it again using the reflection filter, but eventually decided to keep the original recording because I liked the delivery and the phrasing, and I knew I couldn't replicate it.

One of my little mixing quirks is to use uneven numbers when panning. I'm sure it doesn't make a difference, but I just had a fix idea about that. The horn section is actually three different sections that I tried to combine so that it sounded like one: a regular trumpet section, a loud trumpet section (a couple of dB louder) and a soft french horn section. The french horns are meant to sound like a soft brass section with trombones; I didn't like the specific trombone sounds. So the french horns are used for soft chord pads and occasionally to fill out the trumpet sound, while the trumpets are used for the traditional horn lines and hits. Thus I almost don't use any track automation at all.

I lifted the high frequencies on the backing vocals quite a bit to get more clarity and then lowered the volume to make it fit as a package with the lead. I kind of had the backing vocal treatment of Lenny Kravitz in mind, only not as prominent. The lead in the last verse is tripled, or rather, I sing in unison with the lead on the two backing vocal tracks, and then break into occasional harmonies.

What else... I bused all the instruments to separate buses; the drums, guitars, bass, keys, horns and vocals and then I EQ'ed them. Is that a kind of stem mixing?

I suppose that's it—pretty straight forward.

Regarding acoustic treatment of the room, I'm in the process of addressing that: I'm planning to build bass traps. Also I'm thinking of adding a sub, to hear the bass frequencies, but first priority is room treatment.

Hi,

Before I read your reply in detail I wanted to clarify what I meant. I was referring only to the kick, not overall mix. How I would tame the kick, just pull out a few db of upper mids ( where the the hot spot is around 2.5 to 5k) to get rid of the tick ( just a bit). I didn't find the overall mix bright at all. It sound great to me.

smoke

Yeah, I re-read your post and realised that. Still, I think it is a bit harsh in the cymbals, maybe they're just a bit loud, no?

The kick is what stands out to me. I usually don't comment on things that are a more personal flavour or what cannot be changed because it is what it is. Sometimes it takes another set of ears to point out a part we miss because we get used to it. The kick is an easy fix.

Are the drums including the cymbals samples? The cymbals do sound a bit 12 bit and ya, maybe a bit less 5k or so there too. They don't bother me like the kick does. A slight amount of reverb on the kick would help it sit in the mix better.

Stemming is what I do as well, Kudo's. I sum OTB though. I sent stems into a summing amp and add analog glue and colour.

I like the background vocals. That's what adds to that Steely Dan sound I like so much. You don't hear that often so I think you are onto a good sound there. I think your main vocal would sound better in a more live room, better acoustics than with the SE Reflexion Filter. You have such a great sound already, I would invest in my vocal sound a lot now. If you can afford it, look into a bricasti reverb. This would do wonders for opening up your vocal to help improve the ITB sound you are getting from the SE Reflexion Filter. I'm looking at buying one. They are expensive and I keep thinking they will be replaced with a plug-in one day but that doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon, and too much plug-ins aren't good in my opinion anyway. But I'm on the war path back to balance, less plug-ins and a bit of analog boutique spice.

Some analog gear just for your vocal might be just the thing. Something so subtle to take your voice out of the boxy sound and give it some space and a bit of vibe. You are very close, now you just need a little something extra and I think it would be wow.

Hope that helps.

I really like what you are doing.

PS,

Maybe Remy will chime in here and give you some great pointers. She is a lot more experienced with your sound and mix and preamp flavours that could take your sound to the highest level. You are entering that last 2% mode.

Hey, thanks a lot for the constructive criticism!

Actually, the things you're suggesting are exactly what I've been contemplating recently: I was dreaming of getting hold of a good channel strip, or at least a good-sounding preamp for the vocals and maybe one that suits the guitars as well. Any suggestions? I've been ogling the API The Channel Strip, but at the moment it's too expensive. Maybe I can find something used that is equivalent? I'm even toying with the idea of selling off some of my hifi gear; I have a really audiophile setup: a Simaudio MOON i5.3 integrated with a Bluenote (now Goldenote) Koala Tube CD player handmade in Italy and a vinyl player from Hanss Acoustics, German brand making some of its parts in China. (I don't like that, but for once I compromised.) Speakers are a three-way design by Audiophysic, also German. It all sounds really excellent, but I don't have much time to actually listen to music for any longer period of time these days. So I thought maybe if I sell off at least some of it, I can invest in something like you're suggesting. The Bricasti reverb is unfortunately way out of my league, at $3700! If I get hold of that much money at the same time I think I'd go for something more versatile that I could use with the guitars, as well as the rest. Also, I've been thinking of getting a Radial Workhorse for the API 500 series gear: it actually contains a built-in 8-channel summing mixer. What do you think of that piece of gear?

And that summing mixer thing I've been looking into as well. Like I said if I get the money together I'd go for something along the lines of the Radial Workhorse, unless I can find a good deal on a used separate summing mixer. Any suggestions? API does a small version of the "lunchbox" format with 3 slots, if I remember correctly. That's probably cheaper but would it be enough to improve on the vocal sound? I like the fact that the Radial has a built-in summing mixer. And it's half the price of the Bricasti reverb!

Next time I might try to finish the mixing of the instruments, put the file on a laptop and take it to the opera house where I work and record the vocals in one of their rooms. You think that might give it a nicer sound?

Speaking of reverbs, I do use the Lexicon LXP reverb bundle. I haven't really explored it enough yet.

Yes, I also want to get away a bit from the ITB thing, money permitting. Music production gear is so expensive and I'm not a professional who can deduct buying stuff like this off my taxes! At least, not yet.

Thanks again for your input, it's greatly appreciated!

Personally, I think your mixes are to the point that you don't want to go summing OTB unless you invest in high end from this point. It becomes expensive to get that last 2% and you need to do it right. However, tracking and doing some things to help gel your vocal and guitar are a great idea. But your guitar sound in this track is good enough to me. Your lead VOX however is where I would put my money.

I'm a musician (guitarist)/composer/mixer more than I am a recordist so you'll get better help from someone else from this point.

I can however give you some advice on hybrid. Two companies I recommend most for hybrid DAW systems are SPL and Dangerous Music. I'm not familiar with the Radial Workhorse.

You might just need to ADDA your vocal out to a few 500 series goodies, don't know. On this track however, I would personally be looking to improve your vocal sound though a better acoustic space and using gear to add a bit of vibe. This could be a different mic, preamp and quality converter during the tracking process.

audiokid, post: 389743 wrote: Are the drums including the cymbals samples? The cymbals do sound a bit 12 bit and ya, maybe a bit less 5k or so there too. They don't bother me like the kick does. A slight amount of reverb on the kick would help it sit in the mix better.

Yes, they are samples, but actually I think they are 24bit samples. I'm note sure, as we speak, whether they come from the built-in Logic drum kits or the Reason sample library, but if they are from Reason they should be 24bit. I'll check and let you know.

I checked now and the cymbal sounds and percussion are from Logic Pro's built-in drum kits. I decided to use them rather than the cymbals from Reason because I thought they sounded better. However, I'll use the Reason 24bit samples next time to see if they sound better.

I had a look at the SPL stuff and it seems very interesting indeed. Not as expensive as I imagined. I had a closer look at their channel strip Channel One and it retails at around €1209—around $1600, which is affordable by pro audio standards.

I read a review of Dangerous Music's summing mixers, 2-BUS and 2-BUS LT, and that made me interested in the analog summing business. I don't know much about their other products though. I'll have a closer look and I'll try to understand all the tech talk.

When you mention quality converters, do you mean products like the RME Babyface that I'm using? As far as sound cards go I'm really not too good with the ins and outs of digital-to-analog and analog-to-digital conversion. I mean, I don't really need loads of I/O's because I mostly work alone or with a friend and record one track at a time. That's why I figured the Babyface was good enough, with quality conversion and a clean preamp sound. Am I correct in assuming that you're saying there's much more quality to be had regarding ADDA conversion? Are you suggesting that I replace the Babyface? In that case, any suggestions with what, that would not at the same time be overkill for my needs?

This is big topic with many opinions.

I find the biggest issue with digital music and mixing ITB is when you introduce vocals or other acoustically recorded sounds > AD to a VSTi environment through average ADDA and low end micpre's. Like the Babyface. Its okay for projects but its not up to your ability IMO. Not after hearing your talent.

I know this sounds weird but you are kind of mixing water with oil. Oil being your analog vox and water being digital. The digital samples and all the VSTi's sound stellar while your real world tracks ( vocals, acoustic guitars etc) sound less quality than your VSTi's. Its a no brainer when we look at it like this.

So, the vocals or acoustic tracks always sound cheap and (IMHO) out of place compared to ITB music. So what do we all start doing? Plug-ins, and more plug-ins.... and what a gong show and what a business! Its called the curse in my world. The plug-in business is growing and no doubt why. But, its not 100% for me and why I choose hybrid. I like plug-ins for certain apps but not as much as the people whom are cursed with it all. The more you are trying to merge the analog world with digital, the more we need to learn how to glue it together. Hybrid is a balance and it helps this all come together better, faster and I think it sounds better, plus you need less plug-ins. I believe the people who claim to have tried hybrid that didn't find it was any better then ITB, missed something in their set-up because I definitely know it sounds better. Is it starting to make more sense?

But...

The next best thing before hybrid is using great quality pre-amps and converters.This will help a lot. You are at least getting your analog chain up to par with the VSTi and super clean digital sound now right? So investing in a few really nice mic's, pre's, and possibly a compressor and eq with some vibe is just the ticket. And this is what people are more opt to do.

And to take it even further, hybrid and specialty gear is when it gets really fun. But... it comes at a price.... You have to do it right or you will fall into the lost crowd that only took it half way and gave up because they didn't understand it all and didn't use quality gear that mattered. Follow?

Its why OTB is growing. When we mix OTB, it helps glue it all better. Once you step into the high end hybrid DAW world, you will start learning about certain products that works great for a vocal bus, bass, guitars, drums etc. and this is when the summing systems like dangerous music or SPL MixDream come into play, and the converters start becoming more and more important because you are going ITB and OTB convertions. But, I will add, I use the MixDream and love the use of the IO switching it has which keeps my need to ADDA down to a min so I am not doing a SRC more than once.

I'm getting deep into this subject so I'll stop now but I thought I would touch on that for future reference. Everytime you do SRC ( sample rate conversion), sound degrades. Its a big topic, way too much for me to try and explain in one sitting but thats it in a nut shell.

I have to stop here. And forgive any typo's . I'll try and correct those the next time I review what I wrote.

Hope that helps a bit more.

Check this out:

http://www.dangerousmusic.com/products/d-box

and this requires a bit more gear but is also very cool:
http://spl.info/en/products/summing-amps-mixers/mixdream-xp/short-description.html

And this is a very cool product that uses a different approach:
Folcrom
Cheers!

I feel that we are very much on the same wavelength regarding all this. ITB has become ubiquitous the last 20 years, and that's both a good and a bad thing: good, because it makes professional music production available and possible for anyone; and bad because it makes professional music production available and possible for anyone. The plugin business is riding that second wave, that is, they cater to the musically and technically mediocre, talentless people with huge egos, who still want to sound like a megastar, and insist on it being cheap, too. It will always be necessary to pay for higher for quality, and everyone knows an analog piece of kit is higher quality than a digital one. I mean, who would seriously claim that a virtual electric guitar is better than the real thing? To me, digital will always be second best to analog, simply because it factually is—it's a compromise. While in the digital realm one needs to decide how much information is to be left outside the sound reproduction, the dynamic resolution of analog sources are unlimited, period.

Plugins are the McDonald's of the music production. I have at my fingertips over 300 plugins, many of which are professional quality, from the likes of Waves and Lexicon. I can't avoid feeling uneasy though, about products that emulate a legendary piece of analog equipment. Here is a product that people built with their hands, out of physical parts. They put it together after having worked it out by experimenting endlessly and perfecting it for years, sometimes decades. It has proven itself over decades of use by professionals in the studio and live. And now, along comes Waves with a few well-paid snotty teenage computer hackers and simply emulate the sound and performance of that same piece of gear and it's suddenly available to millions of people who have no musical talent and no knowledge about the original piece of equipment and what it's used for. But they can reproduce a professional and aurally attractive sound by just popping it into an insert in Logic and pretend they are a rockstar. The original piece of equipment is fast becoming redundant to the masses (but not to the professionals) and might even go out of business, because more and more professionals are succumbing to the pressure from the digital world. I'm telling you, there will be a backlash—there always is when something swings as hard to one side as it has in the battle between analog-digital.

Of course, I'm working ITB because I can't afford working OTB, and I've had no reason to invest in professional analog gear until now, when I've started toying with the idea of going professional, or at least semi-professional. I'm prepared to invest quite a lot into analog gear, I just need to find out and decide what approach to take—exactly how hybrid I want to go. I'm not sure yet what will work best for me, but I'll research more and will eventually find the answer.

Your analogy of mixing water with oil is spot on. I understand totally and agree 100%. The ITB sounds are clean and crisp while the recorded analog sounds, such as the vocals, sound muddy and muted in comparison. Of course, that's the function of plugins: to fix and patch up the analog sound so that it sounds as clean and crisp as the digital ones, in order to blend it easier with the ITB sounds.

Now, I come from the world of classical music where everything is analog and people frown upon singers who would accept or even consider using a microphone, and all that is well and good: the essence of classical music is that it is played by musicians and sang by singers live, in front of an audience, and the musical communication is direct, with no help or manipulation by EQ or compressors—no middle man—and that the nature of that communication is physical, working on the spiritual. In other words, by the use of the universal physical laws of Nature (such as resonance and harmonics) classical musicians seek to affect the human brain and heart, in order to provoke emotional (and ultimately spiritual) responses in the audience. If any kind of manipulation would come into the equation, it would feel like a let-down, since the whole point of learning a proper singing technique (or instrumental technique) is to be able to do that without expensive mic pre's, fabulous EQ's and brilliant compressors.
The point of that little excursion was that to me what sounds good is the voice (or guitar, or piano, or drums) recorded analog and the ITB sounds, even if they are good samples, are as if they were "dead". They are not organic; they sound exactly the same everytime you push that button.
Consequently, in everything I do I try to make it sound as live and musically spontaneous as possible, as if all the instruments really were played by a real musician, not just me programming everything at two in the morning.

So, to the more practical issues then.

Regarding the Babyface, I suppose it's a combination of ADDA conversion, digital preamps and digital mixer with built-in digital EQ. (I don't use the mixer part at all, in fact, I can hardly understand their Totalmix software, it's very confusing.) So are you suggesting that I simply get gear dedicated to one single task, instead of have an all-in-one solution like the Babyface? So let's say we pick the Babyface apart and replace the individual functions with dedicated gear, what would you suggest?

How about this:
Apogee Ensemble (8 channel FireWire interface - 24bit/192kHz AD/DA converters, 4x digital adjustable mic pre-amps (75dB gain), 4x Hi-Z instrument inputs, 2x headphone outs, 8x channel ADAT I/O, 2x channel SPDIF I/O)
Dangerous Music D-Box

The D-Box has a summing DB-25 input for the eight channels to be summed. Does that mean that I have to have an 8 channel ADDA converter, to match the 8 summing channels? Or an 8 channel preamp? Like I said, I mostly work alone or with a friend and have, thus far, not recorded on two channels simultaneously. It is not that likely that I will in the near future, unless I suddenly start recording bands, or form a band myself (no, not that likely!). So I don't need an 8 channel preamp. I'm a little confused. Is not a straight-forward, good-quality ADDA converter sufficient? It needs to convert the analog signal coming from the preamp into digital to go into the computer, right? Then it needs to be converted again to analog to go into the summing mixer, and then out to the monitors, right? So then maybe I actually do need an 8 channel ADDA converter! I'm thinking "aloud" as it were, sorry if this is basic stuff for you, but this is where I suspect some of my knowledge gaps are.

In the setup above, yes, the preamps are integrated into the Apogee Ensemble. If that is not desirable then it would probably be even better to have a separate preamp, which then goes into the ADDA.

Am I on the right track here?

To finish this post, yes, I've had a look at the Folcrom: it has 16 channels. Again, does that mean I need a 16 channel ADDA converter, to match the Folcrom's 16 channels?

So my big question is: what 16 channels (Folcrom) or 8 channels (D-Box) need to go into the summing mixer?

nice response! thumb

re babyface

most likely an excellent choice for ITB and project work. But, yes, if you want to go OTB and do more, its not going to do it for you.

Do yourself a favour and check out this video on hybrid mixing. There is a free version and a 1hr 20min pay. The pay version is well worth the investment. It will answer a lot of questions.
[="http://www.puremix.net/video/mixing/pop/hybrid-digital-analog-mixing.html?affid=53M0N3X8QL"]Hybrid Digital/Analog Mixing - PUREMIX[/]="http://www.puremix…"]Hybrid Digital/Analog Mixing - PUREMIX[/]

Here are a bunch of free trailers and more:
[[url=http://="http://www.puremix…"]MIXING - PUREMIX[/]="http://www.puremix…"]MIXING - PUREMIX[/]

--------------------------------

For your vocals
I'm not a recordist or remotely proficient in knowing what combinations are choice for a certain style. I have my flavours, you will find yours. If you can go to a pro studio and have them profile you, I would do that if I was you.. You could experiment with mics and pre-amps until you find the right match. You will find the right combo that will totally rock for you.
Are you able to demo gear where you are?

regarding the ADDA. for a functional hybrid rig, you need a minimum of 8x8 AD DA to db25 > Dangerous dbox or SPL MixDream. I would also not invest in a ADDA with built in pre's unless you are doing the remote studio thing or project stuff, which you are outgrowing IMHO. the good ones are pricy. The affordable ones are not what you are looking for IMO. I personally only use the built ins pre's for remote work for a convince. The ones in your RME are most likely why your vocal is suffering.

The Orpheus is an 8x8 and it has built in pre's. Its stellar but its also $4500.00 and still, I think you need a personal preamp with vibe like an API, A-Design, GR or Neve and you may want to check this new pre on the market http://warmaudio.com/.
(This is where a pro studio could really help you discover the right flavour)

On the other hand, Lavry Blacks have 2 track AD DA system with a built in mic pre's. They are excellent for 2 track recording which rock compared to most product on the market. But they are pricy and modular and I think you need a pre for your vocals with vibe and a bit of colour. You may out grow them needing more IO if you choose hybrid too. But, if you did, and bought a larger converter system like Lynx, RME ADI-8 QS, Prism, to name my top picks,, you could do like me and use them for mastering to a second computer and thats when things really start to get fun. But thats another topic down the road. I'm telling you all this so you can see a head. Don't rush your process here. Take your time. If you were in my studio, I would be working on your lead vocal sound until it got the vibe.
Hybrid , solution may follow after if it seems like you want to move that way. I love the Lavry's because they are something that will prove to be very valuable for high end 2 track recording and pre mastering.

Did you master this track I heard here, its very good.

I'll stop now, so much gear and so little time for it all. Hope this helps.

Watch some video's and get back to us here. You'll have new questions.

audiokid, post: 389820 wrote: nice response! thumb

re babyface

most likely an excellent choice for ITB and project work. But, yes, if you want to go OTB and do more, its not going to do it for you.

You're most likely right about the Babyface.

audiokid, post: 389820 wrote: Do yourself a favour and check out this video on hybrid mixing. There is a free version and a 1hr 20min pay. The pay version is well worth the investment. It will answer a lot of questions.
[="http://www.puremix.net/video/mixing/pop/hybrid-digital-analog-mixing.html?affid=53M0N3X8QL"]Hybrid Digital/Analog Mixing - PUREMIX[/]="http://www.puremix…"]Hybrid Digital/Analog Mixing - PUREMIX[/]

Here are a bunch of free trailers and more:
[[url=http://="http://www.puremix…"]MIXING - PUREMIX[/]="http://www.puremix…"]MIXING - PUREMIX[/]

I had a look at the preview clip and sure, it all looks—and, above all, sounds—like great gear. I know the whole tutorial is 1½ hours long, but in the short clip he's hardly using any plugins, only that cut in the 200Hz range. That's like analog, going towards digital—the opposite from what I'm aiming at! Seriously though, I'll think about buying that video tutorial. I'll have a look.

audiokid, post: 389820 wrote: For your vocals
I'm not a recordist or remotely proficient in knowing what combinations are choice for a certain style. I have my flavours, you will find yours. If you can go to a pro studio and have them profile you, I would do that if I was you.. You could experiment with mics and pre-amps until you find the right match. You will find the right combo that will totally rock for you.
Are you able to demo gear where you are?

Well, as far as consumer equipment like the Babyface is concerned, there are a few music stores around in my town. However, as soon as you want something more professional I think they will either fall short and refer you to some other place I've yet to discover, or they will simply order what you want and then you'll "have" to buy it. As far as I know, there is nowhere I can audition professional high-end equipment such as those we're discussing here, apart from one place, actually. Sure, I can buy mostly anything via The German, as we say here ([="http://www.thomann.de/"]Thomann[/]="http://www.thomann…"]Thomann[/]), but to actually have the opportunity to audition something like that is not likely. There's that one place I mentioned where they sell genuinely professional studio gear. I'll see what they have and what their routines are...

audiokid, post: 389820 wrote: regarding the ADDA. for a functional hybrid rig, you need a minimum of 8x8 AD DA to db25 > Dangerous dbox or SPL MixDream.

So I was right when I was thinking aloud...! I think the Mix Dream XP looks very promising, in combination with an 8 channel ADDA from maybe RME. But then we're already in the $4500 area and the possibilities and alternatives are numerous...
I know you're not a fan of the Babyface, but what about the more "grown-up" products of RME? Do they measure up, in your opinion? Or would you suggest another brand for the ADDA conversion? Other than the Lavry Blacks, of course—$3160 for both in a package! I've seen a lot of people talking about Crane Song HEDD 192. I'd never heard of Crane Song before starting to read about pro gear. Of course, it's also very expensive, at least for me at this point. But any good? It's stereo so maybe not usable if I'd want to combine it with the D-Box or MixDream XP?

audiokid, post: 389820 wrote: I would also not invest in a ADDA with built in pre's unless you are doing the remote studio thing or project stuff, which you are outgrowing IMHO. the good ones are pricy. The affordable ones are not what you are looking for IMO. I personally only use the built ins pre's for remote work for a convince. The ones in your RME are most likely why your vocal is suffering.

The Orpheus is an 8x8 and it has built in pre's. Its stellar but its also $4500.00 and still, I think you need a personal preamp with vibe like an API, A-Design, GR or Neve and you may want to check this new pre on the market [[url=http://="http://warmaudio.co…"]Warm Audio | Warm, FAT, Luscious Analogue tone![/]="http://warmaudio.co…"]Warm Audio | Warm, FAT, Luscious Analogue tone![/].
(This is where a pro studio could really help you discover the right flavour)

I've had a closer look at both API and Neve, I know they're both classic brands with a lot of history. I need to hear the gear, before I do anything, I've realised that. I've not heard any of the equipment we've been discussing, so really I've just been going on specs and looks, and everyone knows that's no good at all! So tell me, the API 500 series, do they sound as good as they look? I'm partial to the modular format—relatively easy to change and add new modules, it looks like it's quite easy to handle, doesn't take up as much space as a full-size rack would—but does it deliver a professional sound? And in a Radial Workhorse, with the summing mixer, I'd only need to add an ADDA converter... But like I said, I only speak from having studied the "theory"; I've not done anything in "practice", i.e. I've not yet heard any of this gear. I have to look into where I can do that as soon as possible.

audiokid, post: 389820 wrote: On the other hand, Lavry Blacks have 2 track AD DA system with a built in mic pre's. They are excellent for 2 track recording which rock compared to most product on the market. But they are pricy and modular and I think you need a pre for your vocals with vibe and a bit of colour. You may out grow them needing more IO if you choose hybrid too. But, if you did, and bought a larger converter system like Lynx, RME ADI-8 QS, Prism, to name my top picks,, you could do like me and use them for mastering to a second computer and thats when things really start to get fun. But thats another topic down the road. I'm telling you all this so you can see a head. Don't rush your process here. Take your time. If you were in my studio, I would be working on your lead vocal sound until it got the vibe.
Hybrid , solution may follow after if it seems like you want to move that way. I love the Lavry's because they are something that will prove to be very valuable for high end 2 track recording and pre mastering.

The RME ADI-8 QS costs around $3400 here, including VAT, and that's a lot of money. But you're saying that's the kind of conversion quality that would make a significant difference? Is there any possibility at all to get close to that quality for less money? Please?:smile:

audiokid, post: 389820 wrote: Did you master this track I heard here, its very good.

I'll stop now, so much gear and so little time for it all. Hope this helps.

Watch some video's and get back to us here. You'll have new questions.

And I haven't even seen the complete video! This helps immensely—thank you!

And yeah, I did master that track. Like I said earlier, I did many, many master versions before reaching this version. And I'm not sure this is the final version—in fact, I know it's not, because I need to fix the kick, right?:smile: I kind of used this song to really learn to record, mix and master in Logic Pro. And I did learn a lot, considering that in the first "good" master that I was happy with I used the old mastering trick of tripling the track, inverting the phase on one, making the other mono, adjusting the levels appropriately and busing them to the master out. It sounded "soo much better" than what I'd tried before that. Hahaha.
Actually—as an aside—that trick of tripling the tracks etc. you can do infinite times... I wonder how that sounds. Imagine: doing that once, bouncing it down. Then taking that bounced-down track, tripling it again. And again, and again. I wonder how that would change the sound... Someone must've done that at some point in the 70's while taking large amounts of "medication"...

Enough of that.

So I was happy with that tripled version until I tried to just simply have one track and applying, let's say, a Waves L3-16 and just letting it do whatever it is that it does. Now that started to sound truly professional. Easy on the levers though because it's really easy to overcook it. Really easy.

High end converters are open, wider, transparent, silky and make a bigger difference when you are doing a lot of AD tracking including hybrid. Reason being, the more tracks, the more of the same colour/mud/flavour etc so having something that is very true, transparent and open helps keep it that way as things start to get congested. Other reasons are headroom and gain staging features.

Your setback is the babyface pre. The converter is the least of your problems. I don't like RME pre's at all. They are dry and boring sounding. They are great to get you by but not for pro level but this is the era of MP3 so... great songs are great songs. We can get too caught up in technology. I would forget about hybrid for now ( keep researching it thought) and concentrate on a better chain for your vocals.

So you need to be able to bypass your babyface pre , so you can use a better mic/pre >AD. or, find a better AD that you can use with the mic/pre gear you choose. But remember you need an interface. That's why the BabyFace was a good choice, it has everything in one package. I have an AD11. Its a two track stellar USB AD, pre combo that will allow you to bypass the pre, but you would need the DA11 to monitor. So yes, it is at least $3000 for just 2 tracks.

Look at the Universal Audio Apollo. This is new on the market and it looks pretty nice!

Remember you need something that will allow you to use an external preamp with a good monitor playback and interface. For my RME ADI-8 QS' I used a PCIe card.

The Lavry has a USB interface and the Prism Orpheus has Firewire.

Lynx Hilo might be cool but I don't like the touch screen.

For a first run at all this, wow, you are a natural.

I'm always thinking high end and there are mid level routes that I don't know about that are way less expensive. But there isn't a cheap way around getting killer vocals. Its going to cost you money one way or the other to move beyond what you have now. And what you have now is still really good.

You can bypass the pre's on the BabyFace:

RME User Forum / Bypassing pre-amps on Babyface?

For fun, check this out:

I'm sharing info in hope that it really makes us think past the trends. I'm searching and trolling for others all the time, who share the same vision I suppose. To help support the boutique manufacturers that make the choice gear that works, so we rise and help connect the dots that make our lives better.

I love this one:

Marek Stycos
http://www.audiotaskforce.com/

"To wage war against the tyranny of inferior audio through the empowerment of the people"

There is so much mis information on the web. So many opinions from a lot from people that don't even use the gear they profess to know something about.
My approach is sharing knowledge that will help you see ahead enough so you get a deeper look into pro audio and will then return the favour back . It took me a while to understand the hybrid thing and I'm still having a wow from time to time.

My biggest lesson was Pro Tools 888 24. That trend cost me 50 grand and its all in the closet. I've spent thousands of hours trying to overcome problems with the sound of digital audio since 1980. Todays DAW's are so much better. But, I don't support any turn key systems like Pro Tools for good reason. They are always behind in sound quality and locked into corporate BS that hold us hostage. I invest in modular systems that share the high end hybrid chain. Certain analog gear is going to become very expensive.

I've made very few mistakes in gear purchases and direction over the last 10 years because I've been following the crowd that hears the same problems I do. So I'm not guessing like I used too. I know what I'm trying to do with digital now. The hybrid crowd is finding each other , the cream is rising and the DAW sound is leveling out. It has a sound that is boring and hard to stay attached to. Subliminal maybe. Clean vs dirty, and what house do you have more fun is as a kid?

But in the end, its about the song. All the gear in the world won't make a great song but it sure helps if it has a sound people like hearing more than a few times. Its proven that the analog holds the attention of people longer than digital. This is of course debatable but I think I know why.

I hate trends!facepalm

I can see that I'll have to do this in stages. I'll have a look at what preamps are available around here for auditioning. I think going to a store to audition mic pre's is going to be better than going to a studio to profile my voice, since I'd get the same info from both places, but at the studio I'd probably have to pay for the consultation, without necessarily being any wiser. However, at the store I can get the same info for free and I can repay them by actually doing business with them if I find what I'm looking for.

So here's the plan, over a longer period of time:

• invest in a high-quality mic pre (preferably with tubes), possibly including a good high-Z instrument input;

• invest in a high-quality stand-alone ADDA converter;

• invest in a summing mixer, like the D-Box or Mix Dream XP.

I think I'm set to go down the hybrid way, I like that approach. The sound of digital is inferior to analog, but the editing possibilities of digital is superior to analog, and that's the combination to go for: analog sound (as much as possible), with digital precision editing and mixing. However, we need to keep in mind that having to deal with artistic or technical restrictions is—or should be!—inspiring for a genuine artist. I like the fact that putting everything through only 8 channels on a D-Box or Mix Dream XP would require some creative and artistic problem-solving on my part. Now, I don't have to think about that; I can use however many tracks I want and frankly I find that actually uninspiring. With the summing mixer I'd really have to use stem mixing in order to get the music through the D-Box. On that Sacred Eagle song I used probably more than 20 individual tracks, only because I could, which sort of creates a somewhat cluttered overview.

Right, so thanks a lot again, audiokid, for all the useful and helpful information! I'll get back here after having auditioned at least a couple of mic pre's.

If it's OK with the mods I'll just keep posting here any developments of significance in my endeavours.

Ciao!

One last thing,

I don't know if I would be sold on sticking only with a tube pre. There are a lot of preamps with attitude that are FET too like:. API, GR, Neve, Daking, A-Designs, Also, I just ordered the WA12 from http://warmaudio.com/. It should be here in a week or so, I don't know much about it but the specs say its going to have some meat to it and its under $500.

I’ve hand built high-end preamps for professional studios for some time. Warm Audio was started with the idea that all great musicians deserve fully professional gear, despite their budget. I used to charge $1650 for 2 channels of this design but I wanted to do something different for the industry, something for the musicians.
With a very picky ear I have no interest in creating sub-professional gear. Manufacturing my high-end design at a lower price was only an option if no corners were cut. With high quantities and low profit margins I’ve done it, and am confident you will love it. Others who have paid twice as much love it . The WA12 uses the same quality components I’ve always used including custom USA made Cinemag transformers.
A bold claim? Yep. A lie? Nope. Say goodbye to the $1,000 glass ceiling and say hello to the WA12. The first fully-professional, transformer-balanced mic pre…at a ridiculous price.
Bryce Young
[[url=http://[/URL]="http://warmaudio.co…"]READ REVIEW[/]="http://warmaudio.co…"]READ REVIEW[/]

And for a bit less attitude but big headroom, the newer SPL Premium micpre's are incredible silk and lush. Awesome for acoustic instruments and Vocals. I have 8 of those and love them. So there are a lot of options in SS too.

Glad to help, stay in touch, it was fun discussing hybrid with you.

Cheers!

Hey, don't disappear!!:smile:

I had a look at that Warm Audio preamp and I listened to the example tracks and they sure did sound great. Within the next few days I'll have listened to a few of the preamps available around my neck of the woods and then I'll be able to brief you on the results. In exchange let me know what you think of the Warm Audio preamp when you've had time to listen to it.

I was interested in hybrid before I came here. Now, you've only added to my fascination with it and I'm convinced it is the right way to go for me. Thanks and I'll let you know as soon as I've had a few auditions!

Hey audiokid!

Right, now I've watched the PUREMIX Hybrid Digital/Analog Mixing video tutorial. I suppose my overall general impression of this tutorial is that, let's say, around 10-15% of it was new information to me, mainly regarding the use and application of the dedicated hardware ADDA converter and the 2-BUS. He also had a couple of really helpful explanations regarding the consequences of using analog summing, such as achieving more headroom and an overall more pleasing analog sound, which is obviously really useful. A neat trick that I'll try ITB—even though he used OTB hardware—was to set up a couple of mastering units, such as compression and EQ, on the stereo out bus (mix bus) quite early in the mixing process: he had worked on the vocals and the electric bass sound, and already then he set up the mix bus (light) comp&EQ. The reason he said was (if I remember correctly): without any compression&EQ on the mix bus you would up the levels of the individual instruments too far, even if they're not clipping, so that when you start mastering the track, any compression or EQ on a bass guitar would also affect the rest in that frequency range, resulting in squashing the track. With compression&EQ on the mix bus from the start you would hear what that gentle mix compression&EQ did to your bass guitar sound as you were actually carving it out. As soon as you would push its volume level a little too high you would hear it and notice it in the mix bus. So the result, he said, was that instead of being forced to squash the complete sound with the mastering compressor, you end up with a better-controlled, but more naturally mastered track without having to cut the dynamics of an instrument or the complete track.

I hope that makes sense and that I understood him correctly. I'll definitely try that ITB just to see if it helps the sound.

I think that in general the video was not worth the money, even though it is very informative. $35 is far too much money for a clip you don't even get to keep—you only "rent" it for 30 days. I don't know if that's the price of online streaming of a regular feature-length movie these days, but I don't think so. Since this is really no different I don't see the reason why a "buyer" cannot keep what he's "bought" for $35. However, I think it was a useful video for me personally to watch, because it filled in a few of the gaps I was looking fill in, regarding my own knowledge of these things. Most of the stuff he does though, I already knew, but fair enough, it's always interesting to see how other people work on a track. You don't find many videos on the net of this length for free, discussing such in-depth mixing and mastering techniques.

Now, regarding hardware, watching the video tutorial I realised that my wanting to cut costs by thinking I only need 8 channels for stem mixing was probably just wishful thinking. I suppose I use as many tracks to mix/record/produce a song as this guy does in the video. This simply means I'll need more channels than 8, that's clear. However, still wanting to cut costs—but absolutely not quality—I had a look at what other ADDA converters there are around other than those well-known brands that cost a fortune. I came up with this guy:

[="http://www.ferrofish.de/index.php/en/products-en/a16mkii-en"]Ferrofish A16 MK-II[/]="http://www.ferrofis…"]Ferrofish A16 MK-II[/]

It costs around $1300 instead of almost $3700 for the [[url=http://="http://www.lynxstud…"]Lynx Studio Technology Aurora 16[/]="http://www.lynxstud…"]Lynx Studio Technology Aurora 16[/] that the guy in the tutorial is using. What do you think? Do you know the brand? It seems to be German.

Then, connecting it to either a Dangerous 2-BUS LT ($1700) or the SPL MixDream XP ($1300). Prices are what they would cost me to buy them here, but in US dollars.

Now, I know you've been talking about mic pres, like the SPL Premium RackPack gear, but I just watched the tutorial and in it he talked about summing mixers and conversion, so...

That SPL RackPack looks good, maybe I can/should scratch together the money for a 4-frame with a good mic preamp to start with, and then build it slowly bit by bit?

I believe the A16 MK-II is marketed towards a MADI or ADAT interface. You'll need a MADI interface that I would expect to cost you approx $1500.00 USD. And you need to think about inserting gear and breakout boxes depending on the hybrid summing system you choose. Think it all though really well.

A lot of people like Lynx Aurora 16, they seem to be the best price but not too sure if they are the best quality and features.

For starters, You'll need a PCIe AES EBU that will cost approx $1200 USD.

For 16 x 16, I chose RME over Lynx. Some reasons why I chose RME:

1.) In case one AD DA goes down, I wanted two separate 8 x 8 units rather than 16 x 16 all in one box.
2.) I have read the power supplies are more stable in an 8 x 8 for clock reasons but I have no idea if this is true.
3.) RME have great support and drivers. The totalmix is cool although I find no use for it personally, its there should I need it.
4.) The clock will also automatically find the SR and lock in which is also very time saving when you are checking masters between mixdowns. Although, I master to a second DAW now so this isn't as important as it used to be. I no longer do SRC ITB. Way better sound!.... Another great reason to go hybrid and use a second DAW or mastering box.
5.) My converters have selectable gain stage settings for both AD and DA and a fine adjustments should I need that, I couldn't work without an on-the-fly gain setting option.
Those are the basic features that I would recommend having if you can find something within your budget. Maybe used. So many people having a hard time paying bills, keep your eyes open.
Also, many people that try hybrid give up ( usually lynx Aurora users for some reason) and them off. I expect this to increase now that the Apollo is out.

Interesting to hear your response on the video. It sounds like you have a really good idea about hybrid but I found a few pointers that I would not have known either. I agree, it would be much better not having to go online to watch it. Too bad the world is so full of piracy. I'm sure this is the reason why. I suppose its also better suited for people just beginning to learn about hybrid. Its the best tutorial I found to date. There are others there that I really found helpful too.

16 IO is much better than 8. If you are grouping stereo tracks, that gets used up pretty fast. The MixDream has an added insert switching in each channel which is very useful. You can bypass, insert or completely turn off a channel via these switches.
The Dangerous 2-bus has mono switching on all channels where the MixDream only has 3channels 1 to 6. I which it had them on all the channels but its not a problem either. Both units are awesome.

The XP is the same quiality just missing those extra's.

The [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.dangerou…"]Dangerous 2-Bus[/]="http://www.dangerou…"]Dangerous 2-Bus[/] LT has db25 which I like but if you want to insert gear, you'll need a breakout box or something like that. Keep those things in mind.

More things to think about, but how exciting!

Cheers!

Another VERY important part of your chain is a monitor systems ( not just speakers). I don't know what you have but until I got ( first) the SPL MTC 2381, wow... now I hear my mix's accurate . This is an excellent product and well priced.
Then I got the Dangerous Monitor ST for my main studio and WOW WOW, a few more features and stellar transparency and some added features. More expensive but worth ever penny. You can switch between various tracks, compare mixes seamlessly with pristine accuracy. Both highly recommended products.

I would suspect that 90% of all people mixing ITB are suffering with sub standard monitoring systems. Until you enter that level, you do not know what you are missing. Your mix sounded really nice though so i'm not saying you need this for that, but the features these have are designed for hybrid mixing.

I love and trust both SPL and Dangerous Music because they are high end mastering / hybrid design manufacturers.

Check out video's on the Monitor ST.

Hope this all helps.

Right, here's a setup that might work for me, unless I've overlooked something:

JDK R20 stereo mic preamp (I can get one used for c:a $900 US.)

Passive Mix Plus: 16-channel passive summing mixer, with built-in monitoring by [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.broadcas…"]Broadcast Pro Audio[/]="http://www.broadcas…"]Broadcast Pro Audio[/] (Hand-built in Adelaide, Australia. I can get one new for $1700 AUD, including shipping.)

Since this is a passive unit I could use the stereo JDK R20 preamp (or any other dual channel preamp) to make up the gain lost in the summing. (Maybe a preamp with more options regarding sound and character would be preferable?)

That leaves the ADDA conversion unaddressed. The possibilities are:

• I could get an 8-channel AD/DA converter, and if I later decide I need 16 I have it already covered with the Passive Mix Plus
• I could get a separate 8-channel DA converter and a separate 2-channel AD converter, since the summing output is only 2 channels (this is only to try to cut costs. If it's not worth the hassle/money bothering with separate AD and DA units, then I'll go with the 8-channel one-box AD/DA.)
• I could always get a summing mixer with built-in amplification, and possibly monitoring as well, like the D-Box, however, the D-Box only has 8 channels, so if I realise later that I need 16, I'd have to get another unit altogether. (Regarding the passive summing issue, since I need a mic preamp anyway, there is a possibility to cut costs by getting the Broadcast Pro Audio's Passive Mix Plus, and get double use—mic/guitar pre&makeup gain—for whatever dual preamp I decide to get.)

In addition to all this, I would need a patchbay—if only a very basic one—in order to be able to connect outboard units without hassle, because the connectors into the Passive Mix Plus summing inputs and outputs are DSubs. DSubs into a patchbay makes it easy to connect outboard units without having to resort to breakout cables.

Question regarding the monitoring: let's say I get the 2-Bus LT, which hasn't monitoring built-in, is it actually impossible to work without monitoring? I mean, as it is now, I only have one pair of monitors connected, so do I really need the function of switching between monitors? Of course, I have two more pairs of speakers in the house, both passive, and I could decide to connect any of those (with a separate integrated amp). But is it really necessary to have monitoring at all?

So, is there something I've missed?

I think the price for the Broadcast passive summing mixer is actually really good. And the unit looks great, too. I mean, it looks like it sounds good.:tongue:

erk, i had a nice response for you and hit the wrong button and lost it all. Going from Mac to PC ... I'll try and do it again later...

OK, so I went to my local music shop—the only one I know that sells studio gear—with the intent to audition mic preamps and ended up having a discussion about the UAD Apollo.:rolleyes: The dealer said he thought this would be the best choice for me, since he figured I was the kind of musician who wanted to play music and not fuss around with intricate hardware solutions like the ones I described in the previous post. I'm not so sure about that, but he made a convincing sales pitch for the quad Apollo, and I have to admit it piqued my interest.

Even though I'm sure the Apollo would be a big upgrade sonically for me from the Babyface, one thing that is not so attractive is the fact that it is all in one box. I was looking to expand by acquiring outboard gear, like mic preamps and a summing mixer. But I guess I can always do that later if I get tired of the sound of the Apollo!

In any case, I've agreed to audition the Apollo in a couple of weeks, when they get the units to the shop. The guy said it's selling like crazy and all their units have been sold. I've watched a couple of presentation videos with Fab Dupont and it sure looks like "money", to quote the Vince Vaughn character in "Swingers".thumb

With regards to mic preamps, what about this unit:

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.soundons…"]Universal Audio DCS[/]="http://www.soundons…"]Universal Audio DCS[/]

Any thoughts? I was going to use it on vocals and guitar.

I'll try this again

Not sure about the Passive Mix Plus. What I do recommend is high headroom and transparency for any summing amp and converters system. You want your colour to come from your hardware, not your converters or summing amp.
I use Dangerous and SPL because thats exactly what they are, high headroom and transparent. Both companies are well ahead of the hybrid game.

I don't use a patchbay, but, I am looking into the Liaison. Everyone is different but the hardware I use is dedicated to its stem. I don't use the DAW Aux for inserting analog hardware either. I use them for plug-ins. I also don't want sample rate conversions or latency happening so its another reason why I don't use Aux for analog.
Basically I use the DAW to mix and sent grouped stems OTB bypassing the DAW 2-bus. To summarize, I send all the audio OTB via stems and use specific analog gear inserted between the DA and the summing amp that I trust works best for that stem. The idea is to break up digital clutter by inserting dedicated hardware between the summing amps channels. High Headroom summing amp is key.

Examples:
UA LA-2A's for vocals Stem
UA 1176 for Vocals, Drums, Bass, Guitars, all sorts of things ( I would like about 4 of these)
Transient Designer for drums Stem.
SPL Passeq for MS eqing inserted into the Dangerous Master.
STC-8 for 2-bus compression
A-Designs Hammer for 2-bus EQ
A-Designs Nail for 2-Bus Compression
SPL Kultube for Keyboards and Guitars

I'm plan to add some API gear (comp and EQ), a few stereo Pultec EQ of some kind, a few more EQ's and a Bricasti on the effects stem.

Yes, you could use a 2 track AD and 8 or 16 DA's. A lot of people these days are only tracking 2 tracks at a time, including me. But you also need 2 channels of AD DA for monitoring.

A super transparent monitoring system is IMO one of the most essential parts of a recording chain. From what I gather, most people's monitoring systems are really lacking. They don't know what they are missing! .
The Monitor ST or SPL MTC 2381 are both great systems. Definitely invest in either of these. You will not regret this, trust me. The Monitor ST is very cool, I love this more and more each time I do a new session. I have both. ST being my choice.

The amp you are reading about (I believe ) is to power headphones, not a monitor. Although, I'm not sure what the D-Box has for all the options, (I should read more on it) but I think the amp is for headphones. Thats how it is with the Monitor ST.
The D-box is a great all in one 8 channel system. Fab has so many videos that explain all the dangerous gear, keep watching those, they are also on youtube.

This is just a hunch but I would bet, most people, including sale people selling gear do not know the finer details of a good hybrid DAW. How could they. They would need to have all the gear I mention and be recording a hybrid system for more than a test run to understand and learn to hear it all. After all the years of me running this site, most people do not know much about it. I read a lot on it for two years before I bought into it. And even then, I was confused until I started using my system. Its very expensive compared to ITB but I love it.

The Apollo looks awesome and I think this product is going to take a big piece away from Avid. I think UAD is the king in the plug-in domain now. Pro Tools software is choice but UAD and the Apollo are so cool. I don't think you can go wrong. If you are staying ITB, go apollo.
If you plan to go hybrid, You need cable, a great DA, hardware, and a monitoring system just to get started. Then the gear comes after.

If you are planning to go OTB, you can do it in pieces. Just don't expect huge changes until you get a good chunk of the essentials.

If I was you, I would be looking for a mic-pre and mic combo that suits you perfectly. The resale on the Apollo is going to be great.

Sorry if this is a bit broken up, I've run out of time right now.

To give you an idea of my setup, missing a Hammer:

OK, I've been going nuts over how to connect preamps to the computer without a separate AD between the preamp and the computer, or a preamp built into a converter. My computer takes only Firewire (400&800), USB and audio in/out via S/PDIF. Since it's an iMac G5 it's not possible to insert a PCIe card. This is what I have to work with.

I want to use a separate preamp, let's say a dual preamp. This needs to go into the computer via a dedicated AD converter, using 2 channels. Then the signal goes from the computer (DAW) via an 8-channel DA converter into the D-BOX for the summing. Then the D-BOX outputs an analog stereo signal which has to be converted via a 2-channel AD and back into the computer (DAW).

Now, as far as I understand it there are three places in the signal chain where digital/analog conversion has to take place:

1. Between the preamp and the computer
2. Between the computer and the summing mixer
3. Between the summing mixer and the computer (on the way back)

Now, can one converter perform all these conversions back and forth, no matter where in the chain it should take place?

In addition I need a converter that has the number of line-ins or XLRs I need to connect the number of preamps or other hardware I want.

So the following setup is one of a couple I could think of that would work with my computer:

• Universal Audio DCS preamp via line-in into RME ADI 8 DS
• Computer via S/PDIF into RME ADI 8 DS
• RME ADI 8 DS via 8 line-out into Dangerous D-BOX
• Dangerous D-BOX summed 2-channel output via line-in into RME ADI 8 DS

Now, have I missed anything vital?

I've only tried to work out this particular setup and how it would work with my computer. Remember, it only has Firewire, USB and S/PDIF. That's it.

Is there a cable solution I'm missing here? In other words, can the converter be connected to my computer via something other than the S/PDIF?

The only thing I'm not sure about is whether the connection between the ADI 8 and the computer is well served by the optical S/PDIF connection. I friend of mine had his computer hooked up via S/PDIF to his DAC in his home stereo and there were always problems with the connection of the optical cable. And what about the quality of the signal?

Now, in case I go for their Aurora 8 converter I've checked with the Lynx people whether there is a Firewire 800 option, like they say on their website:

The LT-FW is installed and tested at the factory, so this is a true plug-and-play system for your FireWire 400 or FireWire 800 equipped computer.
[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.lynxstud…"]Aurora 8/FW[/]="http://www.lynxstud…"]Aurora 8/FW[/]

But the Swedish distributor said no. That means that although their Aurora 8 converter can be fitted with an LT-FW 400 interface it's not Firewire 800, which is the fast connection. Maybe this doesn't matter so much in the end. I don't know. What say you?

However, they have now released a built-in expansion USB 2.0 interface:

The LT-USB is an LSlot interface for the Aurora 8 and Aurora 16 A/D D/A converters that provides digital input and output to desktop and portable computers using USB 2.0 ports. Both Mac and Windows computers are supported.Ideal for quick connect and portable applications, the LT-USB allows up to 16 input and output channels at up to 96 kHz, and 8 channels at 192 kHz.
http://www.lynxstudio.com/product_detail.asp?i=58

Supposedly, you'll have to install it yourself. Maybe this could be an option? Although I have to say it's actually too expensive for me at this stage.

OK, I've been going nuts over how to connect preamps to the computer without a separate AD between the preamp and the computer, or a preamp built into a converter. My computer takes only Firewire (400&800), USB and audio in/out via S/PDIF. Since it's an iMac G5 it's not possible to insert a PCIe card. This is what I have to work with.

I know its confusing. The interface is what connects your converter(s) to the computer. Some converters have a built in interface and some need external cards. Converters that are USB or Firewire have the interface built in.

Make sense now? Something else that is confusing is, you may be looking at the back of these converters or an interface and wondering how they connect to everything right? There are breakout cables that plug into the interface that "breakout" into XLR, ADAT, S/PDIF, AES EBU etc. You will need a particular breakout cable for your particular converter. If you choose a USB or Firewire converter, its much simpler because the USB or Firewire uses one cable, not 8 or 16 individuals. The trade off is latency and can also be sound quality.

You can get an older example: 16 in/out PCI interface. [="http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_hdsp_aes32.php"]RME: Hammerfall DSP AES-32[/]="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME: Hammerfall DSP AES-32[/]
They aren't quite as fast as a PCIe but still faster than firewire or USB, and that is your best solution for a hybrid system but the most expensive. I would look for a used one if you go that route. I think you can get them for around $400 USD.
You can also buy a USB or Firewire converter. RME make excellent USB and firewire converters. [[url=http://="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME: Fireface UFX[/]="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME: Fireface UFX[/] or [="http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_fireface_uc.php"]RME: Fireface UC[/]="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME: Fireface UC[/] or [[url=http://="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME: Fireface 800[/]="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME: Fireface 800[/]

I have one of these ( firewire) and they are stellar but pricey, [="http://www.prismsound.com/music_recording/products_subs/orpheus/orpheus_home.php"]Orpheus Recording Interface Home Page[/]="http://www.prismsou…"]Orpheus Recording Interface Home Page[/]

All these above are excellent but the preamps in the RME are to only to get by. The Orpheus pre's are much better. There are more companies but these are my personal recomendations because the drivers are IMHO, the best in the industry.

NOTE: you could be into trouble with an old mac OS though. So be sure the converter/interface driver is compatible with your Mac OS.

I want to use a separate preamp, let's say a dual preamp. This needs to go into the computer via a dedicated AD converter, using 2 channels. Then the signal goes from the computer (DAW) via an 8-channel DA converter into the D-BOX for the summing. Then the D-BOX outputs an analog stereo signal which has to be converted via a 2-channel AD and back into the computer (DAW).

Now, as far as I understand it there are three places in the signal chain where digital/analog conversion has to take place:

1. Between the preamp and the computer
2. Between the computer and the summing mixer
3. Between the summing mixer and the computer (on the way back)

An external pre-amp connects to the analog input of the converter via TRS. So you would need an XLR to TRS from your preamp to the converter. You can go directly into the converter or into other analog hardware like a compressor or EQ if that is what you want. Otherwise, you just go into the converter and then the converter send the digital signal to your DAW to be recorded. This signal is either send via firewire, USB, spdif, adat or AES EBU. That is dependent on your converter.

Make sense?

The summing amp goes between the analog i/o of the converter. This is a bit hard to explain but basically your DAW stems are sent >DA into the summing amp that work in a loop.

As I build my mix, I am usually monitoring it in an analog domain. I avoid the DAW 2-bus during the tracking and mix stage and only use the DAW 2-bus during the final mastering. All my tracks are being sent out right a way to the MixDream. The summing amp ( MixDream, D-Box etc) has a separate monitor out that goes directly to my speakers ( A. B or C monitors) . So everything I am hearing is the analog mix ( but I can switch this at anytime is I choose to as well). It is exactly what I am hearing.
The 2-bus of the summing amp can go to other analog gear like a compressor, EQ, Bricasti etc, or directly back to the analog input of the converter which AD back to the DAW 2 track as a summed analog mix. From there you pre master or master it and done.

Make sense?

Now, can one converter perform all these conversions back and forth, no matter where in the chain it should take place?

yes

In addition I need a converter that has the number of line-ins or XLRs I need to connect the number of preamps or other hardware I want.

So the following setup is one of a couple I could think of that would work with my computer:

• [[url=http://="http://www.uaudio.c…"]Universal Audio[/]="http://www.uaudio.c…"]Universal Audio[/] DCS preamp via line-in into RME ADI 8 DS
• Computer via S/PDIF into RME ADI 8 DS
• RME ADI 8 DS via 8 line-out into Dangerous D-BOX
• Dangerous D-BOX summed 2-channel output via line-in into RME ADI 8 DS

The DBox and many other summing amps use 25pin dsub cable rather than 8 inputs of XLR or TRS. This save space. The is 8 channels of analog made simple. So you would need a cable that is the Dsub for the Dbox and a TRS on the other end to go into your analog input and out puts of the converter.

Make sense?

Now, have I missed anything vital?

You've mentioned the ADI-8 DS. this is a lower end converter than the ADI-8 QS. The QS is a superior converter. The DS is older and not that great.

I've only tried to work out this particular setup and how it would work with my computer. Remember, it only has Firewire, USB and S/PDIF. That's it.

Is there a cable solution I'm missing here? In other words, can the converter be connected to my computer via something other than the S/PDIF?

S/pdif isn't what you want to use.

The only thing I'm not sure about is whether the connection between the ADI 8 and the computer is well served by the optical S/PDIF connection. I friend of mine had his computer hooked up via S/PDIF to his DAC in his home stereo and there were always problems with the connection of the optical cable. And what about the quality of the signal?

Now, in case I go for their Aurora 8 converter I've checked with the Lynx people whether there is a Firewire 800 option, like they say on their website:

The LT-FW is installed and tested at the factory, so this is a true plug-and-play system for your FireWire 400 or FireWire 800 equipped computer.
[="http://www.lynxstudio.com/product_detail.asp?i=50"]Aurora 8/FW[/]="http://www.lynxstud…"]Aurora 8/FW[/]

But the Swedish distributor said no. That means that although their Aurora 8 converter can be fitted with an LT-FW 400 interface it's not Firewire 800, which is the fast connection. Maybe this doesn't matter so much in the end. I don't know. What say you?

However, they have now released a built-in expansion USB 2.0 interface:

Firewire 400 works just fine.

The LT-USB is an LSlot interface for the Aurora 8 and Aurora 16 A/D D/A converters that provides digital input and output to desktop and portable computers using USB 2.0 ports. Both Mac and Windows computers are supported.Ideal for quick connect and portable applications, the LT-USB allows up to 16 input and output channels at up to 96 kHz, and 8 channels at 192 kHz.
[[url=http://="http://www.lynxstud…"]Lynx LT-USB[/]="http://www.lynxstud…"]Lynx LT-USB[/]

Supposedly, you'll have to install it yourself. Maybe this could be an option? Although I have to say it's actually too expensive for me at this stage.

I don't know much about Lynx.
The FireFace 800 is a great system but its dated. Lynx will sound better than that. The UFX sounds better than the Fireface and I'm pretty sure the Lynx Aurora's.

The ADI-8 QS are similar in sound quality to the UFX ( so I'm told but they are not the same converter) and the QS's also have superior gain staging functions that become essential as you grow with your hybrid system.

The D-Box looks like the best deal at that price point. Plus it has a DA converter so you don't need to use 2 channels of your system. All 8 channels of your converter are for summing. This is a good thing!

The Apollo sounds like a great converter but I don't know how it would work with the D-Box. I would call Dangerous Music and talk to them. That would be a killer set-up.

whew, that was a lot to relay.
You have a lot to chew on. Hope that helps

audiokid, post: 390202 wrote: NOTE: you could be into trouble with an old mac OS though. So be sure the converter/interface driver is compatible with your Mac OS.

Hey, don't knock my Mac, it has a faster processor than your PCAudioLabs 3.2GHz and more RAM 8 Gig: my processor is 3.6GHz and I have 12 GB RAM. So there!:cool: I'm sure everything else you have is "bigger" than mine...

audiokid, post: 390202 wrote: As I build my mix, I am usually monitoring it in an analog domain. I avoid the DAW 2-bus during the tracking and mix stage and only use the DAW 2-bus during the final mastering. All my tracks are being sent out right a way to the MixDream. The summing amp ( MixDream, D-Box etc) has a separate monitor out that goes directly to my speakers ( A. B or C monitors) . So everything I am hearing is the analog mix ( but I can switch this at anytime is I choose to as well). It is exactly what I am hearing.
The 2-bus of the summing amp can go to other analog gear like a compressor, EQ, Bricasti etc, or directly back to the analog input of the converter which AD back to the DAW 2 track as a summed analog mix. From there you pre master or master it and done.

Everything is clear. So anything I record via mics and/or preamps via the converter I listen to via the monitor output of the summing amp? If yes, then I would have to route the recorded signal via the summing mixer, yes? Because if not and I route it to the DAW 2-bus then I won't hear it in the monitors? But of course if I want to listen to the DAW 2-bus via the monitors (or any other speaker pair that's connected) this can be done at any time, right?

audiokid, post: 390202 wrote: The DBox and many other summing amps use 25pin dsub cable rather than 8 inputs of XLR or TRS. This save space. The is 8 channels of analog made simple. So you would need a cable that is the Dsub for the Dbox and a TRS on the other end to go into your analog input and out puts of the converter.

Sure, that's clear. Fab Dupont shows that in one of his short videos.

Now, the D-BOX doesn't have an insert jack, right? Not even a DSub connector? That must mean that if I want to insert any analog sound processing between the converter and the D-BOX on the way in I would have to resort to a patchbay, unless I want to cause a serious cable salad, right?
Of course, you're using the SPL MixDream which has insert DSubs for this purpose, right?

audiokid, post: 390202 wrote: The D-Box looks like the best deal at that price point. Plus it has a DA converter so you don't need to use 2 channels of your system. All 8 channels of your converter are for summing. This is a good thing!

The Apollo sounds like a great converter but I don't know how it would work with the D-Box. I would call Dangerous Music and talk to them. That would be a killer set-up.

I think it would work very well with the D-BOX, actually. I've highlighted the crucial points for me:

18 x 24 FireWire/Thunderbolt™-ready audio interface for Mac and PC*Realtime UAD Processing for low-latency (sub-2ms) tracking and mixing w/ UAD Powered Plug-Ins**
Premium mic preamps, top-end converters, and uncompromising analog design
8 analog inputs: 4 digitally controlled analog mic preamps; 8 balanced line inputs; 2 front-panel JFET DIs
14 analog outputs: 8 balanced line outs; 2 digitally-controlled analog monitor outs; 2 dedicated stereo headphone outs
10 channels of digital I/O: 8 channels of ADAT; 2 channels S/PDIF; Wordclock I/O
Dual FireWire 800 ports (standard)
Thunderbolt Option Card for connectivity to new Macs and PCs (card sold separately) †
Available in DUO Core and QUAD Core processor models
Includes “Analog Classics” plug-ins: LA-2A Classic Audio Leveler, 1176LN Limiting Amplifier, and Pultec EQP-1A Program Equalizer

• 8 balanced line outs go to the summing mixer
• Firewire 800 as standard—two of them; that's perfect for me
• Thunderbolt option; this is essential since the industry and the jackals at Apple will force everyone to eventually upgrade so they can make more money
• QUAD Core processor is the only version my local dealer will bring in, since he thinks everyone will want the QUAD and not the DUO. I think he's right for the same reason as in the point above

Plus the apparently great-sounding UAD "Analog Classics" plugins.

I keep trying to avoid the Apollo and yet I find myself gravitating towards it—and to my surprise you're pushing me towards it. Shapeshifter! Bodysnatcher!smoke

By the way, I saw an ad here in Sweden for a used MixDream yesterday for c:a $1600 Canadian. Not bad, right? I'm in the process of trying sell my vinyl rig so let's see what happens. It's a great rig though:

By the way, what's the reason you don't like the Passive Mix Plus?

Hey, don't knock my Mac, it has a faster processor than your [[url=http://[/URL]="http://pcaudiolabs…"]PCAudioLabs[/]="http://pcaudiolabs…"]PCAudioLabs[/] 3.2GHz and more RAM 8 Gig: my processor is 3.6GHz and I have 12 GB RAM. So there!:cool: I'm sure everything else you have is "bigger" than mine...

I was thinking more along the lines of your Mac OS compatibility with the new drivers for whatever interface your choose. The G5 is outdated so you need to check on that before you buy anything computer related. The Apollo as an example.

FWIW, a PCAudioLabs 3.2 965 i7 will eat a G5 alive lol. smoke

The cool thing about hybrid is you may use less plug-ins which free's up your CPU.

Sure, that's clear. Fab Dupont shows that in one of his short videos.

Now, the D-BOX doesn't have an insert jack, right? Not even a DSub connector? That must mean that if I want to insert any analog sound processing between the converter and the D-BOX on the way in I would have to resort to a patchbay, unless I want to cause a serious cable salad, right?
Of course, you're using the SPL MixDream which has insert DSubs for this purpose, right?

I don't have a patchbay, you can get by without one but it would be nice to have one. However, this is why I am buying a Liaison. But I have also been thinking about the new SPL digital router and also the SSL Xpatch. Lots of options there.

That being said, you put the hardware between your converter analog outs and the D-Box analog inputs. Which you will see one dsub insert in this picture. See SUMMING INPUT

I keep trying to avoid the Apollo and yet I find myself gravitating towards it—and to my surprise you're pushing me towards it. Shapeshifter! Bodysnatcher!smoke

No, not really. I'm just trying to help you understand it all better so you make the right decisions. Hybrid done right is expensive so you want to make the right steps from the start. otherwise you MAY give up and never know its true potential. Plus, you could waste a lot of money not getting the right summing box or converter/interface from the start. I don't believe there is a halfway to it but some choose to go hybrid without even adding hardware and say its very helpful. How I see it, you either go for it or stay ITB. Only you know how far you want to go.

The Apollo is the ideal ITB system and it might be perfect for you. It will also have great resale so I don't think you can go wrong.
As cool as it is though, its still ITB sound to me and this is why I choose hybrid. To break up the generic sound of digital and to capitalize on how an analog system deals with transients.
But, to my knowledge this is the best ITB system available. And being able to track using the UAD plug-ins is the coolest ITB feature going.

OK, here's two more possibilities that I think I can expand once I scratch the money together. I'm not trying to get together the whole thing in one go, meaning I'm willing to delay my gratification, if I don't make any mistakes on the way.

• The goal is to have a Dangerous 2-BUS—either the LT or the grand one; OR an SPL MixDream—same thing there, the XP or the big one.

• The converter with either of these I'd like to be either RME UFX (although I would need to use two of its analog outputs for monitoring, if I understand it correctly), OR the RME ADI-8 QS. I could add another one later if I decide to use 16 channels. Until I tried with 8, I don't really know. At least I could work with 8 until I have 16.

A good dual preamp for vocals and guitar. I haven't decided yet which one, because I haven't been able to listen to any yet.

So I thought about this:

Since you said you thought the Apollo would have great second-hand value (within a reasonable time period) I thought I could go with that, and later sell it and get one of the two dedicated RME converters. Until then I could use the Apollo's preamps too, together with whichever summing mixer I get.

The overall plan is that instead of purchasing too many units, all of which I'd have to later sell in order to upgrade, I'd like to get the stuff I really want to end up with from the start. I don't care if it takes longer and costs more, I'm willing to sacrifice time and money to get it the way I want it.

Now, I have a few questions regarding all this (imagine that):

If I only have one pair of active monitors (even if I plan to add another pair, plus a sub), do I really need a Dangerous MONITOR ST to go with the 2-BUS to get sound and to manage the output volume? Same question applies if I get the MixDream. I mean, I have no other pair of monitors to switch between (yet).

Even though the D-BOX seems to be great value, I'm not sure if I want to get that unit, only to find out later that I have to get rid of it in order to get the 16-channel 2-BUS or MixDream.

If I go for the Apollo now with its 8-channels dedicated to summing, I could sell it later and not lose too much in order to get a dedicated 16-channel converter, if I decide to go that way.

Another consideration has to be the upcoming computer upgrade, whenever it has to come, and I don't want to get any hardware that isn't compatible with the computer I'll have to get in the future. By the way, whatever computer it'll be I'll probably stick with Mac, maybe a Mac Pro, so that I can add PCIe modules if I need them.

So what I'm asking you is, will either of these setups work?

• Dangerous 2-BUS LT
UAD Apollo

• SPL MixDream
UAD Apollo

Will I absolutely need a Dangerous MONITOR ST with the first; and will I absolutely need a SPL MTC with the second? I could always add those later, but do I really need a monitoring unit to work efficiently?

By the way, I've put up some of my hifi gear for sale. If all goes well I could get together around $7000 US. If I decide to sell all of it, I could probably get another $1500-$1800.

What do you think?

Sounds like you are understanding things well!

You don't need a monitor controller but, once you have one, you would never settle for a stereo out of a converter again. You want to be able to hear the final mix coming out of the box, directly after the analog 2-bus of your summing amp prior to the AD> DAW or mastering system. And you want the monitoring source to be a clean and as transparent as possible! This is where the SPL 2381 or Monitor ST excel. They are designed for a hybrid DAW, meant to split your 2-bus > monitors and AD for mastering. They also give you the ability to compare mixes, Mix, CD, internet audio, including adjust volumes from multiple sources including speakers and subs which you will want as you grow. They are an essential part of better mixing. People without excellent monitoring systems are suffering IMHO and making mistakes. But this is another topic.
So, you can get by on the converter monitor out ( if it has one) now but definitely plan on this later.
You don't need this to start.

The SPL is a great value at half the cost of the ST. The 2381 is close but not quite as lush as the ST. The ST needs DSub cabling which costs more to set-up too, where the 2381 uses common cabling. Either will work and both have great resale.

All the choices you have will work, its just a matter of configuring the cabling between the converter and the summing amp.

remember this: The summing amp is analog so once you are OTB, its all a matter of cabling and patching between your analog converter and the amps inputs albeit, 8 or 16 channels IO. . The summing amp isn't doing anything in digital. Depending on what summing amp or how much hardware you have, is another reason why you would choose one summing amp over another.

audiokid, post: 390276 wrote: you can get by on the converter monitor out ( if it has one) now but definitely plan on this later.

One quickie:

Can't I connect my monitors to the Monitor Outputs of the 2-BUS LT?

Yes! You can do this with all of them but you don't have a volume control correct?

Quite. That's correct. I have volume knobs on my monitors though, so I can use those until I get a monitor controller. And the Apollo has monitor outs which lets me hear what I'm doing, but if I connect to those I will not hear what the summing mixer is doing, right? But I will have sound at least?

Yes, then you are okay and you are still hearing the sum but it can be coloured or effected by gain staging. Not the best way around this but you are okay.

All in good time.thumb

You have been a great help in all this, audiokid—or can I call you Chris?(y)

I'll let you know how it all goes as soon as there's movement in the financial department. In the meantime I'll start practicing stem mixing on the files Fab used in that Hybrid Analogue/Digital mixing tutorial.

Thanks again!

Chris works indeed.

Skål

(y)

One last thing,

Most pro audio engineers agree that AES EBU is the only way to go. I tend to agree. USB or FireWire are the next best thing but I'm not sure they stack up in a high end hybrid system. They work great for ITB studio's, as a mobile system and for mastering your 2-bus to a second computer but I am reluctant to encourage anyone to go this route should you expand into a 16 channel or more hybrid system.

Personally, I would choose Firewire over USB too because USB seems slower to me. But the Apollo may be the new kid on the block so take this with a grain of salt. Depending on your computer and how you set things up, it may never be an issue for you and USB may be just the ticket. Every year things get better.
I owned two FF800 before I got my ADI-8 QS' and PCIe interface. I used the FF800's about 10 times and knew they weren't for hybrid. They work great in other apps and, I highly recommend them for projects or ITB studios but they didn't sound near as sweet as what I have now and they had more latency. They are extremely stable and an excellent choice for ITB studios.

That being said, I've added an Orpheus to my system that I use for my new mobile rig and for mastering. It is an 8 channel Fire Wire converter and it sounds beautiful. But its never going to see my hybrid rig. Its strictly for mastering and mobile work. Thats all I bought it for.

To give you even more to think about, mastering to a second system is the ultimate so what you buy now could be used for mastering should you expand.

Thats about all I can add. Now you have a lot to digest. Keep in touch,

Skål

After having watched Fab Dupont's tutorial on Hybrid Analogue/Digital Mixing techniques, I decided to practice on the song he works on in that video. The audio files were included in the package that I bought for that very purpose.

So I decided that the most important thing to try is to have the mastering plugins already in place on the 2-bus almost at the beginning. So if I remember correctly, I fixed up the vocals quickly, sorted the panning and then I immediately placed the Waves L3-16 and Center plugins on the 2-bus. Eventually I also ended up with the Kramer MPX tape simulator plugin on the 2-bus, just to see if it works and what it does.

Another issue was to see if I could use only 8 stems, whereas Dupont uses 16. I suppose it worked, but I'd need a little more time than 4 hours, just to fiddle around with other possibilities how to set it up, what instruments to group together, etc.

A constant issue for me is the fact that my room is practically untreated, which leaves me with a lot of bass problems. (It's furnished so it's not totally empty, but no dedicated absorption or diffusion.) I tried to ignore as much as possible the perceived heaviness of the bass and listened a lot in the cans. Purposely, I didn't cut too much in any of the instruments' bass frequencies; in any case not as much as I might've done previously. I was very much aware of the thinness of previous mixes due to this, so I just left more low end there and hoped for the best—I mean I can't really hear what's going on there anyway with my Genelecs.

One last thing I wanted to try was the pumping compression sound that has become such a "trend" (aaarrrghhh—I HATE that!) in songs with this kind of beat. I suppose it does work and suits this kind of song, actually. My goal was to try it, but not overdo it.

So, here it is: relatively quickly mixed and mastered.

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Pointing Fingers[/]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Pointing Fingers[/]

I downloaded this a few months back and should try mixing it too.

Pumping compression sounds better when you get it in time and turn it back until you don't hear it so much. But I haven't heard tracks that are extreme either. I know there is a fad over this, just haven't heard it. Do you have any links of examples?

Regarding treatment: I used to drag along treatment when I played in clubs years ago. I would drape treatment on the side, above me and behind and it helped so much. I was the only band I know in 18 years on the road that did this. And our sound was better than most. But most of all, I loved our sound and that is what contributed to how we all played. Smiling and having fun is a big part of live music. Nothing like hearing yourself better.

I use RealTraps in my studio, they work great. Check our the website. They have tips on how to make your own. Investing in treatment will be the best thing you ever do.