my delta 44 mixes vs. their 8 track HD recording mixes

S

shackrock

New member
i got a delta 44 - and a comp, record right onto the comp.
a friend of mine has one of those 8track systems that is really small, recording on its own HD, etc. etc. i think its one of those alesis ones - its pretty nice.

anyway, when he records bands, his mixes sound REALLY THICK. You know, a ton of low end and drums are all FAT FAT FAT. I kinda like it, then again - it does get to the point where it clips crazy in that llow end, and not to mention the mixes are semi-muddy.

me on the other hand, do it the same way, but with my delta 44. My mixes always tend to come out semi crisp/clear/neat...etc. but mine are not anywhehre near that thickness that he has.

i dont know, i guess i'm wondering if the 2 systems we are recording on makes a difference. and no, we didn't do a REAL test on this stuff to find out (mainly because he's not really a FRIEND, more of an aquaintance i've talked to 2-3 times...lol).

wel, any thoughts on this? could THAT make THAT much of a difference?
 
I don't know of any Alesis 8 track porta studio system s out there. But in my experience, mixing through an analog desk vs mixing all in a computer, there's a big difference. I tracked to ADATs for years. Now I track to an Alesis HD24. For the last four years I've transfered those tracks into a computer for editing. I've done many mixes all inside the computer and always felt that sonicly, something was missing. They just don't sound as fat and warm/round as they do through the console. I've said many times that I have absolutely no problem mixing in a computer. As a matter of fact, I prefer it for the automation. It just sounds thinner to me.
 
This digital world requires 1 thing minimum I am finding. You have to fill out the track volume-wise. As close to 0db as possible and consistantly or you are not taking advantage of the 24 bits of data, or 16 whatever your poison. If you keep the levels up, even if you have to use a limiter or slight compression, your sound will be fatter. If you don't, things will tend to be thinner as you did not use all your bits per sample.

There may be some compensating circuitry in the stand alones too. This to compensate for the thinness of digital. Your computer does not have compensating circuitry, its straight through, and so you have to compensate with plug ins or better pres or effects.

Here is an interesting image I ran across.
 

Attachments

  • dsdresponseneon.gif
    dsdresponseneon.gif
    11.4 KB · Views: 109
shackrock said:
i got a delta 44 - and a comp, record right onto the comp.
a friend of mine has one of those 8track systems that is really small, recording on its own HD, etc. etc. i think its one of those alesis ones - its pretty nice.
Click to expand...

It's interesting to note that he did not once mention that his acquaintance's tracking system was analog, and even said that it is recording to a hard drive.

Analog vs. Digital on the fronts of our brains....
 
that picture doesnt show enough info, if they were all on on top the other with time legends printed left to right youd tell a lot more
 
shackrock said:
i got a delta 44 - and a comp, record right onto the comp.
a friend of mine has one of those 8track systems that is really small, recording on its own HD, etc. etc. i think its one of those alesis ones - its pretty nice.

anyway, when he records bands, his mixes sound REALLY THICK. You know, a ton of low end and drums are all FAT FAT FAT. I kinda like it, then again - it does get to the point where it clips crazy in that llow end, and not to mention the mixes are semi-muddy.

me on the other hand, do it the same way, but with my delta 44. My mixes always tend to come out semi crisp/clear/neat...etc. but mine are not anywhehre near that thickness that he has.

i dont know, i guess i'm wondering if the 2 systems we are recording on makes a difference. and no, we didn't do a REAL test on this stuff to find out (mainly because he's not really a FRIEND, more of an aquaintance i've talked to 2-3 times...lol).

wel, any thoughts on this? could THAT make THAT much of a difference?
Click to expand...

sounds more like skill rather then equipment
 
There are way to many variables. Are you using the same mics? room? preamps? It sounds like you want to find a sound in between the one you two are getting, not too fat but not too thin. Ask how he records things and try to do the same things he does, it could be something as simple as mic placement that's making your mixes sound thin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top