Mixing/Mastering with "Stems" - I don't think I get it...

Nate74

Nate74

HR4FREBR
I'm wrapping up a demo for one of my projects and a good friend of mine who works in the "biz" is going to do some mastering on it.

Probably don't need it since we're just shopping it for some private party work, but I figure it's free, and since he has access to incredible equipment (not to mention 25 years experience) it can't hurt.

Anyway, he asked me to send him the "stems." After I figured out how to give him what he wanted (Upright Bass, Instruments, Drums, Lead Vox, Backing Vox and Effects), I sent them off to him. He explained that he's going to send them through a summing mixer so he can use outboard analog leveling, etc. which I assume means another D/A conversion then a final A/D conversion. I've always thought it was best to stay digital after the initial A/D conversion, but he says with good converters it's not an issue.

So I'm curious about the idea of summing these stems in the analog realm and why that is better than doing it in the DAW where I made the stems and applied the effects?

Heck, I have a Steinberg UR824 that has 8 assignable outputs so I could theoretically send the Stems I created into my little Soundcraft mixer that I use for gigs and sum on that board and then go back into the UR824 as a final stereo mix. Would that be "better" than summing in my DAW? Or are these summing mixers somehow special?

Done some reading but don't quite get what the advantage is... thanks.
 
I believe a summing mixer uses all passive components, but I'm not sure why that gives a better mix. Less noise, I guess, but not sure how much of a difference that makes from an ITB mix. I'm replying moreso to subscribe to the thread and hope someone comes along with a good answer.

Your friend is right about the additional D/A/D conversions; it will be transparent with good converters.
 
There absolutely cannot be less noise (or distortion) in the analog summed mix than the digital. It also almost must change the overall frequency response, even if subtly. These things (the way the analog electronics fail to be perfect) are pretty much exactly why some people think it sounds better, but that is always a subjective thing, and most of it can be reproduced ITB with a little attention.
 
Yeah, it's not necessarily better. Just different.
People summing in analog realm are looking for some unique character from the summing equipment.

If you sum ITB the final render will, or should, be indistinguishable from the open session. Summing through hardware means it will sound different.
Whether it's different good or different bad is down to the gear and the personal preference.

You could certainly experiment by doing 8 channel (4 pair) summing through your mixer.
Generally you'd send stereo pairs so maybe drums on 1+2, bass and lead instruments on 3+4, rhythm on 5+6, and vocals on 7+8?

At worst you'll learn a little something about routing and the process. At best, maybe you'll like the results!

(Edit: As pointed out later in the thread, there are 'clean, colourless' summing boxes too. I don't know why.)
 
Last edited:
I guess for lack of something to do while the wife is out tonight, I might try rigging it up. I can see it being "different" sounding, but "better?" I guess we'll see. The way my buddy asked for the STEMS, he clearly has more than 8 total channels (which I don't) so he'll actually have the freedom to do more than just sum the mix back together. The drums are on their own stereo file, and the upright bass and lead vocals have their own mono files as well. Looking forward to seeing what he does, though I have to say, the mixes that came off the DAW ain't that bad :)

Thanks guys for your thoughts on this. Got me thinking about it the right way at least :)
 
Nate74 said:
I guess for lack of something to do while the wife is out tonight, I might try rigging it up. I can see it being "different" sounding, but "better?" I guess we'll see.
Click to expand...

Why not? :)

Nate74 said:
The way my buddy asked for the STEMS, he clearly has more than 8 total channels (which I don't) so he'll actually have the freedom to do more than just sum the mix back together.
Click to expand...

Hmm, hard to say. It depends how many stems he asked for. The point is to 'just' sum the mix back together. That's summing.
If you start panning, eqing, adjusting faders...that's mixing. ;)

Nate74 said:
Thanks guys for your thoughts on this. Got me thinking about it the right way at least :)
Click to expand...
 
It wouldn't be much different than any other analog mastering process - except for the number of stems (1 for a single stereo signal, [???] for multiple).

That said -- I would *assume* that if he didn't hear an actual advantage to summing and processing individual stems, he'd probably sum digitally and make an analog pass -- again, assuming there is an advantage to the analog process.

Only speaking of my own experiences -- 95 out of 100 times (literally, in my estimation) I use analog processing (along with digital). But with stems, 95 out of 100 times, I sum digitally. I certainly may apply processing to individual stems, but that's usually done digitally and then the 2-buss goes out to the analog chain. Going further, those individual digital tweaks are usually made while the 2-buss is passing through the analog chain.
 
Stupid question I know, but since we're on the subject. ... What exactly is a 'stem' ? It seems like a group or sub group, so why is it called a stem?
 
It occurs to me now tha maybe (?) what Chili was saying was that these passive summers are probably quieter (and cleaner and flatter) than your mixer (not than digital, which was my assumption above), and that's probably true. Your mixer has several active stages before it even gets to the "summing" stage. That part is essentially passive, really, but then followed by another active recovery stage. If there are multiple busses dumping into the main LR, that's another passive summing stage and active recovery again. All of that really must add more noise, distortion, and filtering than a passive resistor network would.

Of course, those passive summing boxes need some kind of active recovery stage after them, too. Most of the time, I think, that would be a mic preamp. Pretty sure that a large part of the appeal of those is that the user gets to decide what that's going to be, and swap out different boxes for different colors and whatever. But then you have to ask how much a rack box full of nothing but jacks and resistors is worth? Yes, hopefully they put some time into closely matching the Rs, and quality jacks aren't super cheap, but...

Most of what I've heard about analog vs digital summing is that analog "images" better with more "clarity" and "detail", but idk even what they think they mean when they say those things. I suspect they mean noise and distortion and filtering.

Back around the turn of the century, when I first became aware of this trend toward analog summing, I predicted a plugin that would model the analog summing devices. A few years later, I almost spat my coffee when I ran across Bootsy's NastyVSD (Virtual Summing Device), but at least that was free! Waves has one now for like $300. :/
 
That makes more sense, with regard to what Chili was saying.

True enough, you have to wonder where the money goes in a box of resistors and sockets but, really, when you're spending the big money there's a lot more to it than that.
Up there you're paying for valve circuitry and/or transformer IO.

Either way, you're meant to be paying for a box with a sound as far as I can tell...Not a clean transparent method of bouncing.
 
You cannot sum with a consumer level mixer like a Mackie, Allen & Heath, or Soundcraft. Originally I thought the same thing but you can't. You will not get the audio benefits of summing through such a low end mixer. A lot of that has to do with the components it's made with. In fact trying to sum through a consumer mixer will damage your tracks more than help them, making them worse off. Don't do it. Trust your friend who has 25 years experience. To sum correctly you'd need a Dangerous 2-Bus LT which is the cheapest summing box to give you a meaningful result. Summing mixers are used due to digital summing sounding in some cases too clean or perfect as analog summing tends to warm up the overall sound after it is summed digitally. In a better way to describe it, it adds harmonic distortion which gives it a little bit of character. If done correct it can make a mix wider, deeper, more musical, and more spacious. Again you aren't going to get that out of your Soundcraft.

I've always thought it was best to stay digital after the initial A/D conversion, but he says with good converters it's not an issue.
Click to expand...

Your friend is correct. With good converters it is not an issue. With digital summing, as mentioned above, it can sound too clean. How you sum is you re-route your stems out from your DAW, to an D/A converter, then to the summing box, then to a A/D converter, and then back into your daw. Trying to sum on your Soundcraft will make your mix worse.
 
IDK, dude. This one is two DB25s, two XLRs, 32 switches, and some resistors for almost $800. If there were transformers or any other fancy mojo happening in there, I'm sure they'd tell us. And you still need a stereo recovery amp that can give you like 35db of quiet gain.
 
In terms of summing boxes $800 isn't 'big money'.

I completely take, and agree with, your point about boxes of resistors.
I'm just making it clear for the OP or whoever that if you spend $8000 on summing, it's not going to be a box of resistors.

Heh, just reading about that thing. Transparent signal path...no colouration. What is the point then?
I guess those are for people summing from tape or something, who don't want any further 'mojo'?
 
If you have high end converters that have 'mojo', maybe you wouldn't want any out of the mixer. Or, if you intend to get the mojo out of the preamp used to bring the volume back up...

Or it could be just another box that really only creates high margins for manufacturers and something for audio cork-sniffers to brag about/swoon over.
 
ashcat_lt said:
Ummm...

"The RMS216 FOLCROM is a high quality passive mixer intended for analog summing of multichannel digital mixes..."
Click to expand...

I made an educated and sensible guess. Fair enough, it was wrong. So, none the wiser as to the point of colourless clean analog summing.
They say the sound is down to your preamps, so why not just put your main outs through a 40 db pad and hit your preamp with that.
Would that be coloured or damaging in some way? Maybe that's their point..IDK.

It's a side discussion, though. All I was trying to say is this ^^ is not what you're getting in a several thousand dollar summing box.
 
Been away a few days and some great discussion happened :) I did let my buddy have the stems he requested and sure enough, I noticed some difference in his mix and the one I summed in Sonar. Enough to contemplate a few thousand dollars to emulate? No way, but still pretty cool. I imagine though, what ever the distortion is that happens in that "magic" analog box, can be emulated in the digital world... if not duplicated even.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top