What do you mix to most of the time?
- Thread starter BigKahuna
- Start date
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Hmm... you had no category for a unit such as the Masterlink, which is both a stand-alone HD recorder AND stand-alone CD-R burner....
Bruce
Bruce
Wallycleaver
New member
no 1/4 inch tape for ya Bruce. Come on man, get with the times. Tape has the "warm" retro sound. I mean (in valley girl tone) As if! Honestly, is the master link hip Bruce? A studio I do work in is thinking about getting one. Tried to demo one at guitar satan but the almighty and wise people who work there state that it works better in a slanted rack. The master link stole my CD!!
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Hey Wally...
...if it's good enough for Roger Nichols, it's good enough for me!!!!!!!!!
(Me and Ed went at it on THAT comment a long while ago....... I think he said something similar to what you said!!!)
Bruce
...if it's good enough for Roger Nichols, it's good enough for me!!!!!!!!!
(Me and Ed went at it on THAT comment a long while ago....... I think he said something similar to what you said!!!)
Bruce
MISTERQCUE
Not Just Anutha Brutha
Either stand-alone cdr or internal plextor.
Still like old-fashion Maxell casettes!
Still like old-fashion Maxell casettes!
heh, good point, Bruce. I probably could just change the HD recorder choice to Masterlink ... I mean what other 2 track HD recorders are out there? (probably lots now that I said that 
)
Interesting results so far (thanks for responding) ... looks like a lot of people mix to computer ... I wonder if that's mainly because a lot of people on this BBS mix on software within their computer or if they actually plug their mixer into their PC for mixdown ... hmmm ... I dunno ... probably both.
I'm actually considering selling my stand alone CDR and mixing to PC exclusively ... I've done a couple things through the computer, like old audio cleanup, ripping mixes off of CD and stuff ... but haven't really used it as a real "mixdown deck" yet ... well not a lot anyway.
I don't really see a downside to that (upside, actually ... because I could do 24bit then) ... but I'm in the routine of buring CDRs when I mix ... old habit maybe.
Anyway, thanks for participating in the poll, you guys!
It's cool to see what people here are using.
)Interesting results so far (thanks for responding) ... looks like a lot of people mix to computer ... I wonder if that's mainly because a lot of people on this BBS mix on software within their computer or if they actually plug their mixer into their PC for mixdown ... hmmm ... I dunno ... probably both.
I'm actually considering selling my stand alone CDR and mixing to PC exclusively ... I've done a couple things through the computer, like old audio cleanup, ripping mixes off of CD and stuff ... but haven't really used it as a real "mixdown deck" yet ... well not a lot anyway.
I don't really see a downside to that (upside, actually ... because I could do 24bit then) ... but I'm in the routine of buring CDRs when I mix ... old habit maybe.
Anyway, thanks for participating in the poll, you guys!
It's cool to see what people here are using.
Does anybody know the big disadvantage of mixing down onto a cd-r/cd-rw. I've been thinking of getting a stand alone cd-r/cd-rw to mix on from a tascam 488 adio 8-track machine - but I'm always getting different opinions. Unfortunately, I have an imac computer which can't use a sound card. But I would like to get my creations onto disc. Anybody have any opinion on mixing down to a stand alone cdr/cdrw - Is it worth the price you pay? Does it sound that much better than an audio tape?
I can think of two disadvantages ...
1- The best resolution you can record at is 16bit/44.1khz .. which for most people is more than adequate .. afterall, that is the standard for CD. Even if your master was 24,000,000bit/96,000,000khz ... it would have to be converted to 16/44.1 when the CDs are made anyway.
2- If you burn to CDR, it is final. So if you forget to unmute the vocals or something else in a mix ... then you just printed a permanent lame take of the tune to the CDR. I've never used CDRWs, but I think you can only redo the very last track of it (I could be wrong). It's a good option, but the discs are more expensive. I don't use them, so I burn a lot of coasters.
I think getter a burner is definitely worth it, though ... CDRs are pretty cheap and the sound quality is excellent. You really can't compare it to analog cassette.
Stand alones are great, but I think it's not only cheaper but also way more flexible to get a good soundcard/internal CDR burner combo for your computer. But if you can't do that, I can't think of a better option ... except maybe a Masterlink.
1- The best resolution you can record at is 16bit/44.1khz .. which for most people is more than adequate .. afterall, that is the standard for CD. Even if your master was 24,000,000bit/96,000,000khz ... it would have to be converted to 16/44.1 when the CDs are made anyway.
2- If you burn to CDR, it is final. So if you forget to unmute the vocals or something else in a mix ... then you just printed a permanent lame take of the tune to the CDR. I've never used CDRWs, but I think you can only redo the very last track of it (I could be wrong). It's a good option, but the discs are more expensive. I don't use them, so I burn a lot of coasters.
I think getter a burner is definitely worth it, though ... CDRs are pretty cheap and the sound quality is excellent. You really can't compare it to analog cassette.
Stand alones are great, but I think it's not only cheaper but also way more flexible to get a good soundcard/internal CDR burner combo for your computer. But if you can't do that, I can't think of a better option ... except maybe a Masterlink.
The Masterlink is a cool box made by Alesis. Basically, it's a hard-disk recorder that allows you to perform some mastering functions and then burn to a CD ... all within the same box. Pretty cool, actually.
You'll probably get more info off the Alesis site ... here's a link:
http://www.alesis.com/products/ml9600/index.html
You'll probably get more info off the Alesis site ... here's a link:
http://www.alesis.com/products/ml9600/index.html
TeyshaBlue
It's the smell..
I've been thinking of picking up one of these, but I have arranged a little 5 day demo in my studio first....I spend alot of cash at the local shop. My only initial reservation is the mention of Alesis and compression in the same sentence! Surely the on-board compression is uh....hmmm...usable. Anyone used this little box yet?
drstawl
Banned
The question was: "What do you mix down to?"
If you screw up the mix it's gonna be garbage no matter what medium you use.
And Big K: you can erase the Whole CDRW and start over, no problem. You can also erase the last track you added which is where you got that confusing information.
Permanence has its advantages when you get it right!
My TASCAM CDRW-5000 was alot cheaper than a Masterlink. Now that it's obsolete, the remaining stock can be had for $500.
I also mix down to PC, but the question was: what do you usually mix down to? When I record live I run the output of my mixing board into the TASCAM. At home I don't need a mixer because I mix in SW so I mix down to PC. Then burn to a Yamaha CDR drive.
If you screw up the mix it's gonna be garbage no matter what medium you use.
And Big K: you can erase the Whole CDRW and start over, no problem. You can also erase the last track you added which is where you got that confusing information.
Permanence has its advantages when you get it right!
My TASCAM CDRW-5000 was alot cheaper than a Masterlink. Now that it's obsolete, the remaining stock can be had for $500.
I also mix down to PC, but the question was: what do you usually mix down to? When I record live I run the output of my mixing board into the TASCAM. At home I don't need a mixer because I mix in SW so I mix down to PC. Then burn to a Yamaha CDR drive.
sjoko2
New member
I have used a masterlink for a while now, and its a great tool!
My main reason for using it has been archiving old masters kept on DAT and 1/4", which are by nature prone to deteriorate in time. With the masterlink I can transfer them at a high resolution, which is a big advantage. Store the disks and at least you don't have to worry about anything happening to the quality.
Also, the mastering programs within the masterlink are good and easy to use.
For mixing down to a master I normally go direct to a Marantz burner, to the masterlink, or to a 1/4" Studer, depending on the kind of music and a client's / record company's wishes.
We also mix surround and thank goodness the new 733 Mac comes with its own burner. The burner itself was more expensive as a stand-alone than the Mac with the burner included!
Anyway, I can really recommend the masterlink (providing Alesis doesn't go bankrupt - bank called their loans in and they have "let go" of a whole lot of people) But hey, someone wil buy them
My main reason for using it has been archiving old masters kept on DAT and 1/4", which are by nature prone to deteriorate in time. With the masterlink I can transfer them at a high resolution, which is a big advantage. Store the disks and at least you don't have to worry about anything happening to the quality.
Also, the mastering programs within the masterlink are good and easy to use.
For mixing down to a master I normally go direct to a Marantz burner, to the masterlink, or to a 1/4" Studer, depending on the kind of music and a client's / record company's wishes.
We also mix surround and thank goodness the new 733 Mac comes with its own burner. The burner itself was more expensive as a stand-alone than the Mac with the burner included!
Anyway, I can really recommend the masterlink (providing Alesis doesn't go bankrupt - bank called their loans in and they have "let go" of a whole lot of people) But hey, someone wil buy them
sjoko2
New member
BigKahuna:
"1- The best resolution you can record at is 16bit/44.1khz .. which for most people is more than adequate .. afterall, that is the standard for CD. Even if your master was 24,000,000bit/96,000,000khz ... it would have to be converted to 16/44.1 when the CDs are made anyway."
If you have access to higher bit rate recording, you should always use it, despite the fact that CD's are 16/44.1. The difference between a project recorded at CD quality - and one recorded at a higher sampling rate, dithered down to 16/44.1 is very big. Processing tracks in the digital domain at 16 bit sounds awfull, like sandpaper. Compound this over all tracks and........
That is also the reason why most good digital consoles have internal floating point processing at bit rates of 30 plus.
Difficult to explain the difference without drawing it. Just think of a wave with 2 lines down through it at equal distance. This would be the points where your audio is sampled. The rest doesn't exist anymore once you have it in a digital format. Lets call this a 16 bit sample. Now consider that, when you "up" the bit rate, every one bit more virtually doubles the sampling rate. Go from 16 to 17 bit and you'll have 4 lines through your wave, four sampling points. From 17 to 18 bit, and you have 16 lines, 19 bit 256. When you get to 24 bit, you'll have millions of lines running through your wave
" 2- If you burn to CDR, it is final. So if you forget to unmute the vocals or something else in a mix ... then you just printed a permanent lame take of the tune to the CDR. I've never used CDRWs, but I think you can only redo the very last track of it (I could be wrong). It's a good option, but the discs are more expensive. I don't use them, so I burn a lot of coasters."
When we are mixing a project we will burn the "days work" on a CDRW, so people can go and listen to it at home, in their cars etc. At the end of the next day we'll just burn the next bit, so overall it works out a helluvalot cheaper than giving them another CD every day. And yes - you can erase whatever you like.
"normal" PC burners are getting better and better. If I copy a disk on my PC - one that is already at 16/44.1 - there is no difference whatever in the quality of that disk or the one on for instance a Masterlink. The main quality difference is in converting A/D and of cause D/A, as well as in clock accuracy. This is a "hot topic" at the moment, as even the hardware provided by the top DAW's, like Pro Tools, have lousy clocks as well as lousy converters, with a very low (106 Db max) dynamic range.
In the end - I think either I'm confused or there is some confusion around (I'm good at confusion!!) All my tracks / mixes are on drives and while we make quick copies on 16/44.1, they stay there until a project's final mix is ready.
After that we do the format conversion, dither down to 16 bit or do a format conversion / data compression for DVD or DVDA
Hope that helps
"1- The best resolution you can record at is 16bit/44.1khz .. which for most people is more than adequate .. afterall, that is the standard for CD. Even if your master was 24,000,000bit/96,000,000khz ... it would have to be converted to 16/44.1 when the CDs are made anyway."
If you have access to higher bit rate recording, you should always use it, despite the fact that CD's are 16/44.1. The difference between a project recorded at CD quality - and one recorded at a higher sampling rate, dithered down to 16/44.1 is very big. Processing tracks in the digital domain at 16 bit sounds awfull, like sandpaper. Compound this over all tracks and........
That is also the reason why most good digital consoles have internal floating point processing at bit rates of 30 plus.
Difficult to explain the difference without drawing it. Just think of a wave with 2 lines down through it at equal distance. This would be the points where your audio is sampled. The rest doesn't exist anymore once you have it in a digital format. Lets call this a 16 bit sample. Now consider that, when you "up" the bit rate, every one bit more virtually doubles the sampling rate. Go from 16 to 17 bit and you'll have 4 lines through your wave, four sampling points. From 17 to 18 bit, and you have 16 lines, 19 bit 256. When you get to 24 bit, you'll have millions of lines running through your wave
" 2- If you burn to CDR, it is final. So if you forget to unmute the vocals or something else in a mix ... then you just printed a permanent lame take of the tune to the CDR. I've never used CDRWs, but I think you can only redo the very last track of it (I could be wrong). It's a good option, but the discs are more expensive. I don't use them, so I burn a lot of coasters."
When we are mixing a project we will burn the "days work" on a CDRW, so people can go and listen to it at home, in their cars etc. At the end of the next day we'll just burn the next bit, so overall it works out a helluvalot cheaper than giving them another CD every day. And yes - you can erase whatever you like.
"normal" PC burners are getting better and better. If I copy a disk on my PC - one that is already at 16/44.1 - there is no difference whatever in the quality of that disk or the one on for instance a Masterlink. The main quality difference is in converting A/D and of cause D/A, as well as in clock accuracy. This is a "hot topic" at the moment, as even the hardware provided by the top DAW's, like Pro Tools, have lousy clocks as well as lousy converters, with a very low (106 Db max) dynamic range.
In the end - I think either I'm confused or there is some confusion around (I'm good at confusion!!) All my tracks / mixes are on drives and while we make quick copies on 16/44.1, they stay there until a project's final mix is ready.
After that we do the format conversion, dither down to 16 bit or do a format conversion / data compression for DVD or DVDA
Hope that helps
I thought that there would be a couple people mixing to VCR ... because I remember quite a few people on this BBS asking about it a while ago. I thought maybe some might still be doing it.
I guess the large margin of computer mix-downs doesn't surprise me ... but only 4 people mixing to cassette ... it just goes to show how much home recording has changed.
I guess the large margin of computer mix-downs doesn't surprise me ... but only 4 people mixing to cassette ... it just goes to show how much home recording has changed.
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Some players can play CD-RWs, many can't..... the ones that will play CD-Rs don't necessarily play CD-RWs..... it's a mixed bag until manufacturers get their acts together...BigKahuna said:
From a client perspective, they are going to be more likely to be able to play back a CD-R only and not CD-RWs... (for example, boom-boxes.....)
Bruce
sjoko2
New member
Hey Bruce, and everyone else...
I think I should explain things a bit further, perhaps I should have done this in an earlier post:
People have been slow to "warm-up" to DVD burners for 2 very good reasons: incompatibility issues and high prices. However, all that is about to change.
There are 2 competing recordable DVD drives on the market, DVD-RAM and DVD-RW.
DVD-RAM drives are made by Hitachi, Panasonic and Toshiba and sold by a variety of vendors for as little as $500. A good price, but the big problem is that the disks won't work with most stand-alone DVD players. These burners are now used frequently in audio, post-production and video production for backing-up digital data, replacing the traditional digital tape back-up systems, as they are multiple times faster.
DVD-RW drives, thusfar available for between $4 and $5.000, don't have the problems associated with the DVD-RAM drives. DVD-RW is expected to become the standard for DVD burners. In January, Pioneer New Media Technologies announced the DVR-103. This system records disks that can be played in any player. It will be available as a stand-alone, and can be found in the new 733 MHz Mac.
The DVR-103 can read all types of CD and DVD and can record CD-R, CD-RW and DVD-R disks. Its capability to write to the DVD-RW format is currently pending approval of the DVD forum, expected to be granted very soon.
The DVD-103 is by far the fastest DVD recorder, capable of filling a 4.7 GB disk in just under 30 minutes (for back-up - compare this to digital tape running all night for the same amount of information!).
Prices for a stand-alone DVD-130 are expected to drop immediately from the current 4 to 5 thousand to approximately one thousand dollars. No doubt this will drop considerably when more computer manufacturers incorporate the DVD-130 as a standard or as an option intheir systems. On the PC side, both Dell and Compaq are planning such releases.
I hope this explains "things" a bit clearer
I think I should explain things a bit further, perhaps I should have done this in an earlier post:
People have been slow to "warm-up" to DVD burners for 2 very good reasons: incompatibility issues and high prices. However, all that is about to change.
There are 2 competing recordable DVD drives on the market, DVD-RAM and DVD-RW.
DVD-RAM drives are made by Hitachi, Panasonic and Toshiba and sold by a variety of vendors for as little as $500. A good price, but the big problem is that the disks won't work with most stand-alone DVD players. These burners are now used frequently in audio, post-production and video production for backing-up digital data, replacing the traditional digital tape back-up systems, as they are multiple times faster.
DVD-RW drives, thusfar available for between $4 and $5.000, don't have the problems associated with the DVD-RAM drives. DVD-RW is expected to become the standard for DVD burners. In January, Pioneer New Media Technologies announced the DVR-103. This system records disks that can be played in any player. It will be available as a stand-alone, and can be found in the new 733 MHz Mac.
The DVR-103 can read all types of CD and DVD and can record CD-R, CD-RW and DVD-R disks. Its capability to write to the DVD-RW format is currently pending approval of the DVD forum, expected to be granted very soon.
The DVD-103 is by far the fastest DVD recorder, capable of filling a 4.7 GB disk in just under 30 minutes (for back-up - compare this to digital tape running all night for the same amount of information!).
Prices for a stand-alone DVD-130 are expected to drop immediately from the current 4 to 5 thousand to approximately one thousand dollars. No doubt this will drop considerably when more computer manufacturers incorporate the DVD-130 as a standard or as an option intheir systems. On the PC side, both Dell and Compaq are planning such releases.
I hope this explains "things" a bit clearer
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Thanks Sjoko2!
That's the "...manufacturers getting their acts together..." I was hoping for!
Bruce
That's the "...manufacturers getting their acts together..." I was hoping for!
Bruce