1. Dear Guest, if you haven't already... enter to WIN Samplitude Pro X4!
    Dismiss Notice

Analog Summing Boxes ?

Discussion in 'Summing / Mastering consoles' started by Tommy osuna, Nov 29, 2014.

  1. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Location:
    77 Sunset Lane.
    i'm using a summing box to mix out of a daw because it sounds better than going out of the 2-bus in the daw. .... we've been through that before.

    i want to print to a simple program like Ardour or Audacity. then i can reload back into my daw for mastering / processing if i like. it's to replace the Mackie i use to sum / mix.

    in the end i hope to find a deal on a Focusrite Forte' for 2 track A/D.... i am under the impression the pres in the Forte' are ISA types and the converters are better than many. am i right about this? something like the Forte' is about as spendy as i am willing to go.
     
  2. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    Well, I'd say it all over again but I don't think its registering. What you are suggesting here is a very scaled down, ass backwards attempt at what you could do, better. But, it might cost a few more bucks, i dunno.
    Simply understanding what I said would give me hope for you. No disrespect intended but I know you are an upfront guy so I'll be upfront, At this point, not even understanding the benefits to MS during mixing or mastering has kind of blown me away there pal. But, I understand you like it simple so this is why I am wondering why you are even doing what you are doing.
    No idea. Why are you needing these, and/ or these particular pre's to say the Millennia or? The Lundahl has what you expect to help?
     
  3. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Location:
    77 Sunset Lane.
    for make up gain for the LittleOne. that's the beauty of these kind of sum box's ... you can choose what "flavor" you want to sum with ... it could be transformerless /super clean or tons of iron in the path ....or anywhere in between. and you're never stuck in the same place.

    the box i ordered needs 26 dB gain .... right in the middle of what most decent pres deliver and just enough to have to drive the pres a bit.

    i get what you have already described but it really doesn't interest me. i am not into "sound design" or re-creating spaces. i will go so far as to use reverbs but for the most part i am more interested in capture in a real space that already sounds good. not so much into the whole "control" thing computer tweaking after the fact. i just want a decent platform to mix into that doesn't flaten out the sound stage. i need something that will retain the image ... not recreate it.
     
  4. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    A reason the DAW has trouble, or you don't like how your ITB mix sounds is because something doesn't play well on the 2-bus. That we all get.
    I suppose this could also have something to do with your source.
    Could it be that your tape deck feeding your previous DAW and the conversion / clocking, moved your center and sides closer together/ smearing it all?

    Now you are ITB and your DAW is super sensitive to it all and going, WTF is this. :coffee:

    Most clocks from 2005 back sucked pretty much anyway.

    2014, Trying to improve a bad capture with little ability to clean up the transient smearing is nothing short of impossible unless you take a more mastering approach, which is what I am suggesting regardless.
    You're not seeing why you hate the daw or your mixes, thus, blaming the DAW more than it deserves at this point. There is nothing wrong with the DAW per-say, but there is something wrong with how you are capturing or summing. Which, is why you/ I hope this new setup will help.

    IMHO, all it will do is smear it a bit more but I am hopeful, it does it well. I suppose the added analog step will break apart the transients on one end and put it back together on the other with a new stereo twist. It will change something without doubt. But, by no means will you actually tighten up or sonically improve much. You will be adding more distortion and smearing. My suggestion was M/S so you could at least try and get the space back to the original day you recorded it all.

    I wish you the best.
     
  5. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Location:
    77 Sunset Lane.
    Chris what i was speaking of were projects tracked in the daw .... i haven't even begun too do the archiving project .... that's coming after the holidays.
     
  6. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    I know,

    Projects that you recorded years back right? What did you use (converter etc)?
    I'm pretty certain I understand what you are doing. If you have any questions, or need to bounce a track off me to see if I can help, or confirm you are getting the best results with what you have, I'd be happy to help if I can.Just as a second ear even. Or just for fun.

    In the mean time, I'm excited for you. I've read a lot of good things about the Focusrite Forte. I saw one for sale @ $250 I think. This is a good time to be looking. People need money or are upgrading something. If I was you, for what you are doing, I would completely stay away from a tranny.

    Cheers!
     
  7. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Location:
    77 Sunset Lane.
    yeah i missed that by 2 days waiting for paypal .....

    that's the up side with passive mixers ... you can try different kinds of pres for make up gain ... and you're not stuck with one type. it can be clean or colored ...
     
  8. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    I agree
    I will by a folcrom someday

    You should keep your budget funds in PayPal ready so you don't loose the next desk
     
  9. Gette

    Gette Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    Home Page:
    Hmm,,,, did you just slip on over to my point view? :D
     
  10. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    Cell phone auto correction typoSo you don't loose the next eBay
    Deal
     
  11. Gette

    Gette Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    Home Page:
    :ROFLMAO: I knew there would be clarification….
     
  12. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
  13. Boswell

    Boswell Moderator Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    Home Page:
    There's one little trick I usually do if I'm mixing a solo artist (e.g. vocal plus guitar) and that is to mix as usual on an external mixer as L-R and then convert in analog to M-S before sending off to the capture device, where I convert back to L-R digitally. In this way, I don't have to rely implicitly on the two channels of the capture ADC being identically matched to keep the central image absolutely constant. Unless I chose to record that artist's guitar in M-S, the stereo information in these types of recordings is usually ambiance plus added effects, so the real information is in the middle.

    I got there through the frequent need to generate a separate mono mix, I and realised I needed only the S channel to get the stereo information, so could do it all in one pass using a single stereo ADC. I was surprised when for certain types of recordings that method gave me better stereo than I got from X-Y capture.
     
    Namin and audiokid like this.
  14. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    Excellent.
    That's what I do with the Dangerous Master. Works great eh. (y) How are you converting to M-S in analog, Bos?
     
  15. Boswell

    Boswell Moderator Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    Home Page:
    It's one of my own design of passive M-S converter boxes. I have a few of these, all different, but the one I normally use is transformer-based, so there may be a bit of magic going on there as well.
     
    Namin likes this.
  16. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    If it sums tight and sounds good, you may have something worth marketing? If so, I personally think this step is more important than a lot of other purchases.
     
  17. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Location:
    77 Sunset Lane.
    http://prorecordingworkshop.lefora.com/topic/4123058/Analog-Mid-Side-Encoding-Diagram#.VI3xm1E24UQ

    this is interesting .....
     
  18. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    I like this:

    Personally, I don't use M/S for adding/ exaggerating width. I use it to sculpt and clean up cluttered mixes while centering everything better. Which, there has never been a mix I didn't use M/S for. Well, except for mono. ;)

    Majority overuse it like an effect. And some M/S decoders, or whatever they are called are not good at all. They good up the mix balances and create phase.
    M/S is not an effect to me, its a tool to clean and improve a cluttered stereo mix. Checking in mono tells us the truth. Its very easy to spoil the balances of instruments so you need to check in mono all the time. (Which is why I was asking Tommy at the beginning of this thread to let us hear whats happening with his summing box in mono). Summing boxes have a reputation of doing this without knowing. Its a gimmick imho.

    The Dangerous Master can pull the side back when the mix was unknowingly subjected to a cheapo MS effect. Works both ways.

    Did I read this right? a transformer is a requirement to decode this accurately? The technical is a mystery to me. Chris Muth is no dummy and the one he built, that I and hundreds of Mastering engineers use, if I recall, doesn't have a tranny, or does it. I should ask Dangerous to read that thread and comment.
    Mixing in M/S has been a great interest to me for years. When you are mixing other people's music, I don't leave home without it. :)

    Bos? what are your thoughts on the tranny. You obviously use one?
     
  19. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Location:
    77 Sunset Lane.
    only if you want to do it passively. you can go active too, no transformers needed but then you have to deal with the quality of which amplifiers are used. it can also be done with software.
     
  20. Gette

    Gette Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    Home Page:
    A big fat can o warms.....
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice