Am I crazy? Leaving "the box"

  • Thread starter Thread starter madmax25
  • Start date Start date
madmax25

madmax25

New member
So I've been farting around with Pro Tools and my digi 002r for 3 or 4 years now and I'm done with mixing with a mouse. I feel like I'm trying to paint a beautiful piece of art in MS Paint. It's becoming quite the buzz kill. I need knobs and sliders! I've always been an old-school freak and I'm thinking that I would enjoy mixing OTB.

I mainly record 3-5 piece garage bands and so far I've made it work with 8 inputs. I was thinking of adding another 8 ins via ADAT with an alesis ai3 or the like, plus a 16 channel board, something along the lines of a mackie 1604. This way I would have a total of 16 in, 16 out (in PT). I would track and clean stuff up in PT---> send the 16 channels to the mixer----> send the stereo mix back into the computer. And I don't care about automation; I kinda like the idea of mixing on-the-fly.
Is the extra a/d d/a and questionable sound quality of the mackie going to cancel out any of the pluses i would get from having a more comfortable, connected and arguably better sounding 'mix'?

(And i'm not crazy about simply adding a control surface, plus I do live sound too, so I could use the board for that as well)

TIA,
Elliot
 
If you have to ask if your crazy, you're probably not...yet. :)

You just gotta ask yourself if it's worth it to you to spend the money on all your new gear just to feel better about it. It probably won't have a huge effect one way or the other on the overall quality of your mixes; there are pluses and minuses on both sides, and any advantage one way or another will probably be only incremental.

Think of it as moving from MSPaint to the Tempra paints you used in school, except the paint will cost you an extra fifteen hundred or so. If it's worth tht to you to get a real brush in your hands, then more power to you.

BTW, DaVinci probably would be able to do the Last Supper in both MSPaint and Tempra paints, and wouldn't care. (Hell, he'd probaby use the paints to design a new type of computer mouse for MSPaint :D)

The question not which tool you use, but what you create with it.

G.
 
One thing to think about is that mixing outside the box requires xtra conversion which is directly related to the quality of your converters. Also more cabling which can become somewhat expensive for decent cables. I'd recommend staying ITB unless you have better than average conversion. Just something to think about.
 
Why don´t just use a control surface (and buy an aditional console for live sound)?

Something like the (now discontinuyed) Tascam US2400 seems to be the best option... You can stay ITB and still have faders and knobs! :)
 
i have the 1604. i even like the 1604 for what it is. i'd stay in the box if you're going that route..

if you're talking something like a studiomaster or something along those lines - i'd look into getting out of the box - particularly if you're doing that garage rock. i find using a board makes it easier to mix more visceral stuff.

plus strictly from a 'marketing perspective' (barf) - punk/garage kids like the analog stuff. i find it's somewhat of a thoughtless knee jerk reaction, but they flock to it like white on rice. they attribute magical powers to it. hell, they think their records hinge on it!

so, 1 vote for a decent board.

later............

Mike
 
madmax25 said:
So I've been farting around with Pro Tools and my digi 002r for 3 or 4 years now and I'm done with mixing with a mouse. I feel like I'm trying to paint a beautiful piece of art in MS Paint. It's becoming quite the buzz kill. I need knobs and sliders! I've always been an old-school freak and I'm thinking that I would enjoy mixing OTB.

I mainly record 3-5 piece garage bands and so far I've made it work with 8 inputs. I was thinking of adding another 8 ins via ADAT with an alesis ai3 or the like, plus a 16 channel board, something along the lines of a mackie 1604. This way I would have a total of 16 in, 16 out (in PT). I would track and clean stuff up in PT---> send the 16 channels to the mixer----> send the stereo mix back into the computer. And I don't care about automation; I kinda like the idea of mixing on-the-fly.
Is the extra a/d d/a and questionable sound quality of the mackie going to cancel out any of the pluses i would get from having a more comfortable, connected and arguably better sounding 'mix'?

(And i'm not crazy about simply adding a control surface, plus I do live sound too, so I could use the board for that as well)

TIA,
Elliot
Click to expand...


I grew up with tape and mixing consoles. There is no fun in using a mouse. I use a mixing console and that is that. I can't mix with a mouse.
 
JuliánFernández said:
Why don´t just use a control surface (and buy an aditional console for live sound)?

Something like the (now discontinuyed) Tascam US2400 seems to be the best option... You can stay ITB and still have faders and knobs! :)
Click to expand...

Those things suck. They rarely. if ever have all channels and you could spend all day "assigning" all the knobs and faders to whatever function you want.
 
madmax25 said:
So I've been farting around with Pro Tools and my digi 002r for 3 or 4 years now and I'm done with mixing with a mouse. I feel like I'm trying to paint a beautiful piece of art in MS Paint. It's becoming quite the buzz kill. I need knobs and sliders! I've always been an old-school freak and I'm thinking that I would enjoy mixing OTB.

I mainly record 3-5 piece garage bands and so far I've made it work with 8 inputs. I was thinking of adding another 8 ins via ADAT with an alesis ai3 or the like, plus a 16 channel board, something along the lines of a mackie 1604. This way I would have a total of 16 in, 16 out (in PT). I would track and clean stuff up in PT---> send the 16 channels to the mixer----> send the stereo mix back into the computer. And I don't care about automation; I kinda like the idea of mixing on-the-fly.
Is the extra a/d d/a and questionable sound quality of the mackie going to cancel out any of the pluses i would get from having a more comfortable, connected and arguably better sounding 'mix'?

(And i'm not crazy about simply adding a control surface, plus I do live sound too, so I could use the board for that as well)

TIA,
Elliot
Click to expand...

Your not crazy. It all comes down to how you like to work.

I grew up mixing ITB and when I got this Yamaha n12 I tried OTB for the first time and I will never use a mouse again. Man I like 100mm faders/:D
 
Well, if you have to mix with a console, then yes, you should mix with a console, end of story.

But the chain you are talking about will be, put mildly, somewhat less than transparent. You might think it's good colored or bad colored, or you might never notice the color if that's the only way you mix. I dunno.

I did just finish a summing box for a client who kept asking if I was using top quality components and if the box would be totally colorless. A simple passive summing box is just a few jacks and resistors, so no worries there. But colorless? Well, the summing will be perceived as having the color of the chain. If my converters have way more noise than a 10K resistor (they do, and yours will too), then the summing will too. If my converters have harmonic distortion and intermodulation distortion, then the summing will too.

It could very well be that people like the sound of noise and distortion (and in the case of an AI3, high frequency rolloff). But will you like that? I dunno. I can guarantee that an ITB mix will not suffer from such issues. But then again, for garage bands it might be just the ticket.

I do know that the EQ on a Mackie 1604 is essentially worthless, so I wouldn't plan on relying on it.
 
If you mean one of the new Mackie Onyx 1604 mixers, then that would be quite viable. In fact, I think you would notice an improvement in your mixes.

Using *both* ITB and OTB in my opinion is the best of both worlds. You can do the detailed cleanup and fixing very easily ITB, and then go OTB for the nicer blend and feel of an analog mix. Things pull together better in analog.

Overall I think your plan is worth it. Perhaps consider a used Frontier Designs Tango24 instead of the Alesis AI3. And don't use one of those early Mackie 1604 mixers. A 1604 VLZ would be as old as I would go with that, and preferably an Onyx if you can swing it financially.
 
In my experience mixing OTB never would sound as good as ITB until I improved the quality of my converters. I used RME multiface, M-audio, RME fireface and could never get quality mixes OTB. Wasn't until I stepped up a level to Lucid and RME ADI that I could get my mixes sounding as good or better than ITB. Just my opinion but i wouldn't spend money on it unless you can afford better conversion. Buy better mics and pre's and improve your tracking chain instead.
 
i still don't understand the cocept of OTB / ITB can someone link me to a guide or explanation so you don't have to actually bother explaining it to me?
 
tojo:

ITB = In the Box - i.e. mixing with software: software faders, eq, effects, etc.
OTB = Outta the Box - i.e. mixing with a standalone console/mixer, external eq, effect, etc.

I agree with what others have said... there are pro's and con's to both approaches. I, like you, prefer real knobs and faders under my fingers, so I use a control surface instead of a mouse. Mine happens to be a TASCAM FW-1082 and I love it, but I don't know how well it would play with ProTools. To mshilarious' points, introducing an outboard console will introduce the color & flavor of the outboard console into your mix - which may be good or bad depending on your personal preference.
 
Wow, thanks for all the great replies!
I figured one of the biggest setbacks would be AD conversion. In that regard I've been kicking around the idea of sending in my 002r to Black Lion Audio...seems like everyone is happy with it. Would that plus a better adat eliminate the conversion argument?

SonicAlbert- That's exactly what I had in mind as far as a hybrid setup.

As far as coloration, I'd probably be happy with some. Throw in some noise and distortion:D. I'm a fan of "warmer" recordings....unless the coloration you guys are talking about is really gross...

So as far as boards, i'm looking at newer models of the 1604....any other suggestions for something in that range that's infinitely better? (and I love scavenging on ebay for crusty stuff)


And someday I'll come to the realization that I'm a poor college kid and I can't really afford any of this:rolleyes:...

Thanks,
Elliot
 
KineticSound said:
introducing an outboard console will introduce the color & flavor of the outboard console into your mix - which may be good or bad depending on your personal preference.
Click to expand...
And depending even more on the console. Get yourself a nice used Trident or Amek or something along those lines, and there can be a definite advantage, and not only for mixing, but for tracking as well.

But our road warrior here is talking about a Mackie 1604-series. As the owner of one myself (used for live and location mixing/submixing mostly), I can say that it's a serviceable mixer that has it's place, but most definitely will not provide any sonic advantage to mix through. If he wants to use it because he needs faders and knobs, fine; but not to expect it to give any warm and fuzzies over to the sound of the mix.

I sympathize completely with the desire to have a physical control surface, mad max. I have been preaching that personal mantra my entire career; there just is no substitute for the tactile feel of a real board.

That said, though, I have also equally fallen in love with the automation capabilities and non-destructive nature of a good non-linear digital editor. Fader jockying is great, but you just cant manually match what can be done with automation ITB, especially when you have 20+ tracks laid out on the operating table (which the 1604 can't even handle.) And have you ever tried programming automation into an analog console? Fuggedaboudit; It's like chiseling hieroglyphics into marble compared with the ease of rubberband automation. Plus the whole idea of non-destructive editing ads yet another layer of flexibility and speed you just can't get with console mixing.

If you still really desire an analog desk, knock yourself out. But I'd keep the ITB option in your tool belt as well, and use the best tool for the task at hand. You can still do a lot of editing and automating ITB and do a final mix on the console, for example, to achieve a mix quality that you just cannot get with just one or the other.

G.
 
i didnt read most of the thread but you ARENT crazy. I couldnt STAND dealing with OTB crap. I LOVE mousing around and recoridng into my computer.

but it isnt for everyone.

Do whatever gets the music out, simple as that. There are gives and takes with each.
 
madmax25 said:
Wow, thanks for all the great replies!
I figured one of the biggest setbacks would be AD conversion. In that regard I've been kicking around the idea of sending in my 002r to Black Lion Audio...seems like everyone is happy with it. Would that plus a better adat eliminate the conversion argument?
Click to expand...

What do you mean by better ADAT? I don't get that. The BLA 002, at least according to reports, should be better than an AI3, which is an OK bit of kit but something like eight years old now.

As far as coloration, I'd probably be happy with some. Throw in some noise and distortion:D. I'm a fan of "warmer" recordings....unless the coloration you guys are talking about is really gross...
Click to expand...

Well, what do you want in a console? The EQ or just the summing? I know from personal experience that the old 1604s are just muddy. Noise I dunno, because I have only used them live, but I would worry about that. The EQ is three band, with the bass at 80Hz and the high at 12kHz, and one sweepable mid. From my point of view, that's about one generally useful but not fully parametric band of EQ for mixing, which doesn't sound that great. I see the Onyx adds a second band of sweepable mid; that's good. Mod the high to 8kHz and I'd be a lot happier mixing with it, but that's just my preference.

I think what you should do is look at what you do, however grudgingly, with EQ plugs and see if the board you want is a reasonable substitute. If not, you're still in plugland for EQ, and the board becomes an overgrown summing bus--with no automation.
 
I say go for it. These days most converters are pretty damn good so it's not worth fussing too much about conversions - excessive processing in the box can do just as much damage to the signal. Just make sure you get a good mixing desk. A used mixer will lose you less money if you change your mind but in any case a mixer is a handy bit of kit to have available. I still use my mixer when tracking and for EQing sends and returns with my hardware effects boxes.

Having said that, if you're having to do a lot of frigging around in the box, ask yourself if you're getting good enough results when you're tracking. Careful mic selection and positioning (always in context of the mix, never in "solo") will go a long way to simplifying and speeding up mixing.
 
A mixer will not change the way your mixes sound, At the studio I used to work for we had a mackie d8b it was hooked up with protools and we also had it hooked up to run on a hd24 standalone hard disk recorder. Mine and my bosses mixes sounded the same on both machines, the difference is what you perceive it to be. Nine out of ten times there is none, and even if it is there isn't a guarantee that you could notice it, So I would say just grab you a control surface and save a couple of grand. That way you have what you want and that is faders and knobs.

PS and even using the hard disk recorder you still had to use a mouse every now and then
 
RD423, that's a digital mixer versus a digital mixer. Both are essentially in the box, even though one is an external hardware box. What we are talking about here is mixing ITB (digital) versus OTB (analog).

I used to own a couple Tascam DM-24 mixers and found little difference between them and mixing in software. However, I do find a difference between mixing in software and mixing on an analog console.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top