DAW mixing through a console or inside the computer

  • Thread starter Thread starter Executivos
  • Start date Start date
E

Executivos

New member
I have a digi 001, and of course my mixes never quite sound like I want them to.

I'm not looking for some mix-o-matic plugin--

I'm still learning but I've been doing this for about 2 years? I've done some "big" work for a label (not big in any stretch of the imagination....one release is around 30,000 copies since october, the other is 20,000 copies since december)

Anyway aside from the answers of "learn how to mix better" which I'm working on -- time and practice, I've read a lot about people with daw's getting better results by routing busses to an analog board and having the audio mixed that way as opposed to "summing" in the digital environment. The theory makes sense I guess.

Anyone have experience with this/can offer any opinion?

I was thinking about renting a board for the weekend to try it out.

If I do this, can I still just automate my levels in protools and keep the faders at 0? I don't need to mix on the console i just want it to add the signals together in an analog form.
 
yes but with the digi001 you only have 8 outputs, unless you get a another D/A convertor via Light pipe.

Also some people claim that the digi001 convertors are terrible. I don't know tat or not.

Have you tried upgrading the clock?
 
There's a substantial thread already going on this very subject. It's my opinion that mixes do sound better going through an analog console rather than mixing in the box. A lot of unresolved main mix buss summing issues.
I track to an Alesis HD24 (and to a much lesser degree, ADATs) and transfer the track to computer through a MOTU 2408 mkII. I use Cakewalk Pro Audio 9 or Vegas for editing and then send the tweaked tracks back through the MOTU to the HD24 (acting as D/A converters) to a StudioMaster analog console for mixing. I'd rather mix with the mouse but the console just sounds much better to my ear than software mixing.
 
I absolutely can't stand mixing within a DAW. It's boring as hell. However, I could easily spend 6-8 hours mixing on a nice board.
 
toadies said:
yes but with the digi001 you only have 8 outputs, unless you get a another D/A convertor via Light pipe.

Also some people claim that the digi001 convertors are terrible. I don't know tat or not.

Have you tried upgrading the clock?
Click to expand...

#1 the converters in the digi 001 are not the best, although I hear that getting a clock (like the lucid one) helps a lot...that was part of my plan.

#2 you're right I only have 8 channels right now. I am debating over buying an additional converter for this, but I kinda want to know that it will make a noticable difference...I guess you could say I'm in the research phase right now. I was going to bus the drums & gtrs to stereo channels (i know bussing is exactly what I'm trying to avoid) to make room on 8 outputs. I guess I could send the drum tracks to the mixer, and back into protools stereo, and do that to decrease the tracks for my final mix.

I guess I'll just rent a mixer and try it a few different ways. Thanks for the help!
 
The two issues to avoid are bussing and volume change. It would actually be better to keep all the DAW faders at 0 and adjust volume on the board. Sjoko2, one of the members here with a good digital background claims that you can usually combine up to 6 digital tracks before you get noticeable degradation from the software summing buss so use that as a guide.

If you are serious about recording and you want the best of both worlds I would recomend you check out the Radar systems www.izcorp.com. For less than $10k you would have 24 channels of killer AD/DA convertors and 24ch of digital i/o to shuttle stuff to the DAW for editing or processing. Not to mention a great 24 channel HDR system with full editing capabilities. When you add up the costs of external convertors and clocks the Radar starts to look pretty cheap. Some studios use them just for the convertors and I/O as a front end on their DAW systems.
 
With 10K, believe me, my DAW can sound way better...can buy good pres, good clock and good converters...
 
6 tracks....got it....thats really good information. I remember sjoko. I haven't seen him around. He kinda disapeared after he finished his studio.

I've heard a lot about radar and that seems to be the only digital system that maintains great sound. thats kind of sad actually.
 
Executivos said:
I've heard a lot about radar and that seems to be the only digital system that maintains great sound. thats kind of sad actually.
Click to expand...
Wooa! Not so. The Radar is indeed a very fine system but I have to chime in. I run an Alesis HD24 clocked with a Lucid GenX6 and I believe it's above consumer grade by a few steps.
 
Track Rat...
Thats what im sayng...with that kind of money you can improve your sound a lot...good clocks like Lucid or apogee, and a good pre...BTW, i read somewhere, that the people that use the radar basic setup, uses external pres and clocks like any other DAW...
 
TexRoadkill said:
The two issues to avoid are bussing and volume change. It would actually be better to keep all the DAW faders at 0 and adjust volume on the board. Sjoko2, one of the members here with a good digital background claims that you can usually combine up to 6 digital tracks before you get noticeable degradation from the software summing buss so use that as a guide...
Click to expand...

Excuse my ignorance, but could someone explain "the software summing buss" to me. I'm not quite sure what that means...


Vice
 
It refers to software mixers. All the individual tracks have to be mixed or "summed' together to make a stereo output (say 24 tracks summed to two). The weakness we're talking about is how the software goes about this task.
 
What would you want to buss together.

Lets say you have 8 tracks max out.

I have 5 tracks for drums
Snare
Bass
1 overhead
2 toms

2 guitar tracks which have about 3 tracks per guitar
closed mic
room mic
DI

1 bass track DI in

2 Vocal tracks

Thats a total of 14 tracks.

Right now i uselly bus drums to 1 stero Aux track, each guitar, to its own track, then bass and vocals.

That would buss out 6 tracks.

Right now i mix in the computer. I uselly bus everything that has multiple tracks of same interment (ie rythem, lead) to a AUX track and then EQ or comp and mix to taste. Am I doing this wrong?
 
I think the issue is not quite so clearcut. I run a Pro Tools HD-2 studio and do all my mixing within the program. Does it sound like I used 2" tape through a Neve board? Undoubtedly not.

But can I make professional sounding recordings competetive with other commercial releases? I think I can. And a lot of people have paid me a fair amount of money to do so and have been happy with the results.

There may well be a limiting factor as to just how good you can get my system to sound compared to a high end studio mixing on a million dollar console, but factors like microphone quality, preamp quality, room acoustics, and talent play an exponentially greater role in determining the ultimate sound quality than whether you use the software faders and busses or not.

And the advantages of cost, editing, and recallability are compelling.
 
Cheo said:
Track Rat...
Thats what im sayng...with that kind of money you can improve your sound a lot...good clocks like Lucid or apogee, and a good pre...BTW, i read somewhere, that the people that use the radar basic setup, uses external pres and clocks like any other DAW...
Click to expand...

Of course you use external pre's since it is just a recorder. If you can get 24ch 44.1/12 ch 96khz of killer ADC for less than $8000 let us know because 2 channels of good DAC usually runs about $2-4K and that isn't even including clocks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top