M
Mo-Kay
Dragon Soul Productions
right now....it's all computer right here
It's gonna be computer+emu 1820m+studiomaster analogue desk though
It's gonna be computer+emu 1820m+studiomaster analogue desk though
M
Mo-Kay
Dragon Soul Productions
reshp1 said:I took the liberty of subscribing you to a few dating services. You have been entered as "male seeking male." You can thank me later
WHAHAHHAHAH
M
MXStudios
New member
I Have Pro-tools and use the M-Audio Keystation 88 Keyboard controller. It has faders and knobs that are all assignable. It works as a midicontroller to the Pro-tools Mixer.
Always feels better to be able to slide the faders.
Always feels better to be able to slide the faders.
A
analogfreak
New member
Thread: What do you mix through?
Based on most of the responses to this thread, I think I'm doing things a bit differently than most.
Version A: In the studio.
live instruments --> Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro--> Sony TCKA3ES --> CD burner
Version B: Remote recordings.
live instruments --> Behringer UB 1202--> Tascam 112 MkII--> then bring it home and dump to CD burner
The music is something like post-Shorter jazz meets ECM (?) and this setup works really well. I particularly like the Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro in the studio. The Behringer UB 1202 is *o.k.* but leaves a little to be desired (not quite as well defined soundstage but almost; not quite as full sounding but almost.)
Main mics: Rode NT5 stereo pair for percussion or for entire ensemble; Rode NT3, Shure SM 58 and SM 57. Bass is DI'd.
I just ordered a Tascam 122 MkIII for both in-studio and remote recordings. Question: As a next step, should I get a better mixer than the Behringer for the remote recordings? I want to leave my Mackie as-is in the studio, already set up. Would a Spirit folio notepad or Yamaha MG 10/2 or another Mackie 1202 VLZ pro be a wise investment for remote recordings? I'm trying to keep it very small so I can carry it in a backpack.
Saludos,
Michael Yoder
http://www.ambientjazzduo.8m.net
Based on most of the responses to this thread, I think I'm doing things a bit differently than most.
Version A: In the studio.
live instruments --> Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro--> Sony TCKA3ES --> CD burner
Version B: Remote recordings.
live instruments --> Behringer UB 1202--> Tascam 112 MkII--> then bring it home and dump to CD burner
The music is something like post-Shorter jazz meets ECM (?) and this setup works really well. I particularly like the Mackie 1202 VLZ Pro in the studio. The Behringer UB 1202 is *o.k.* but leaves a little to be desired (not quite as well defined soundstage but almost; not quite as full sounding but almost.)
Main mics: Rode NT5 stereo pair for percussion or for entire ensemble; Rode NT3, Shure SM 58 and SM 57. Bass is DI'd.
I just ordered a Tascam 122 MkIII for both in-studio and remote recordings. Question: As a next step, should I get a better mixer than the Behringer for the remote recordings? I want to leave my Mackie as-is in the studio, already set up. Would a Spirit folio notepad or Yamaha MG 10/2 or another Mackie 1202 VLZ pro be a wise investment for remote recordings? I'm trying to keep it very small so I can carry it in a backpack.
Saludos,
Michael Yoder
http://www.ambientjazzduo.8m.net
JazzMang
He's Junktastic!
Your Mom said:
My anus.
___________________
Z
Zed10R
New member
I do all my mixing in my computer. If a track isn't thick enough, I create another track, record the part again, and bounce. Poof - all better now. If a track sounds cold and strile, I PLAY it better. Again - poof all fixed. I dunno about all the analog superiority stuff going on here. My sound is not on the level of some the pros here, but I attribute that to my own abilities. I get a good enough sound to be proud of....and I don't physically slide any faders..... 
JazzMang
He's Junktastic!
Zed10R said:I do all my mixing in my computer. If a track isn't thick enough, I create another track, record the part again, and bounce. Poof - all better now. If a track sounds cold and strile, I PLAY it better. Again - poof all fixed. I dunno about all the analog superiority stuff going on here. My sound is not on the level of some the pros here, but I attribute that to my own abilities. I get a good enough sound to be proud of....and I don't physically slide any faders.....
I pooped once.
C
Cloneboy Studio
.
Strangely enough I've done the "mix down thru an analog console to avoid the summing buss of ProTools" and I was *THOUROUGHLY* disatisfied with the results. Too much effort for what I percieved as a loss of my mix. It just didn't sound like MY mix.
Maybe it was the mixer, because it was an Allen & Heath System 8/24... although I always felt that mixer sounded really good.
Right now I'm doing all my mixing in ProTools HD. Although my mixdown chain usually includes McDSP G Console (set to API or Neve most of the time, SSL for rap) to Analog Channel AC2. I'm very pleased with the results.
Example:
Maybe it was the mixer, because it was an Allen & Heath System 8/24... although I always felt that mixer sounded really good.
Right now I'm doing all my mixing in ProTools HD. Although my mixdown chain usually includes McDSP G Console (set to API or Neve most of the time, SSL for rap) to Analog Channel AC2. I'm very pleased with the results.
Example:
M
Mo-Kay
Dragon Soul Productions
I must say, I grew up with computers, but the whole sitting-at-the-desk-staring-at-a-screen-clicking-and-dragging is starting to bug me when it comes to things like mixing.
Surely I love the whole analog modelling FX/virtual instruments/recording with a nice overview thing... but I don't like mixing with my mouse.
I'm gonna move in with my uncle soon, but that'll just be for a month or two (I'm going to college and don't have a room that I can rent yet)...after that...it's grouping within the pc and sending out the 8 outputs of my 1820m to my 24ch. Studiomaster desk.
But even before that...I hope to get my hands on that Behringer BCF2000 controller.
F*ckamouseformixing!
Surely I love the whole analog modelling FX/virtual instruments/recording with a nice overview thing... but I don't like mixing with my mouse.
I'm gonna move in with my uncle soon, but that'll just be for a month or two (I'm going to college and don't have a room that I can rent yet)...after that...it's grouping within the pc and sending out the 8 outputs of my 1820m to my 24ch. Studiomaster desk.
But even before that...I hope to get my hands on that Behringer BCF2000 controller.
F*ckamouseformixing!
Fieva
facebook.com/fieva
Right now it's all in the box for me, but I've thought about looking into slowly adding console to my setup for extra methods of mayhem. If I built it piece by piece it would take longer, but I'd have more quality gear for what I do. I'd rather have quality than going the quick fix method. That only keeps you replacing cheap stuff when you can wait and get good stuff. Hell, right now, I don't have the room in my space to add too much, but I plan to relocate to where I'd have more than enough so who knows where that might go.
C
Cloneboy Studio
.
Mo-Kay said:
Yeah, that sucks. That's why I have a Control 24.
P
PowRGnome
New member
A/d
Fostex Model 80->Tascam 208->Mia MIDI->WaveLab for music tracks
Overdub vocals in SONAR.
Fostex Model 80->Tascam 208->Mia MIDI->WaveLab for music tracks
Overdub vocals in SONAR.
jmorris
New member
well.....
I record directly into many different mic preamps. Anything from V72a's, LangevinAM16, Altec 9475a's. Lots of pairs of odd stuff.Plus 24 channels of Focusrites. I bypass the console while tracking( a Peavey AMS Production series 36 input,24 monitor).All mic inputs go straight into my Alesis HD24. Then, in most cases into Sonar 5 producer via a Motu 2408MkIII. Then to Masterlink in most cases. I do "master/tweak" in SF 6.0 but I'm not sold on it. I was suprised to see Bear say he likes the processing in Masterlink better than plugins. I feel the same way. I thought I was just goofy! That stupid tape sim in SF is useless ,at least for me. Sounds like all it did is roll off highs and bring up a little bass! I want to sometime better use my board for mixes. Maybe send some outputs from Sonar 5 to the board. Maybe busses of drums,vox, guitars etc. See what it sounds like. I could send all 24 outs of the Motu 2408 through my second HD24( USE IT'S LIGHT PIPE) then 24 analog out to console for final mix. I have been afraid of running through converters too many times. Bad idea?
I record directly into many different mic preamps. Anything from V72a's, LangevinAM16, Altec 9475a's. Lots of pairs of odd stuff.Plus 24 channels of Focusrites. I bypass the console while tracking( a Peavey AMS Production series 36 input,24 monitor).All mic inputs go straight into my Alesis HD24. Then, in most cases into Sonar 5 producer via a Motu 2408MkIII. Then to Masterlink in most cases. I do "master/tweak" in SF 6.0 but I'm not sold on it. I was suprised to see Bear say he likes the processing in Masterlink better than plugins. I feel the same way. I thought I was just goofy! That stupid tape sim in SF is useless ,at least for me. Sounds like all it did is roll off highs and bring up a little bass! I want to sometime better use my board for mixes. Maybe send some outputs from Sonar 5 to the board. Maybe busses of drums,vox, guitars etc. See what it sounds like. I could send all 24 outs of the Motu 2408 through my second HD24( USE IT'S LIGHT PIPE) then 24 analog out to console for final mix. I have been afraid of running through converters too many times. Bad idea?
LeeRosario
New member
Blue Bear Sound said:
I dunno, I've heard some impressive reviews on that impact buss compressor plug in for TDM. Still, bussing and summing in DAWs dosn't sound all that great to me just yet.
B
Bob's Mods
New member
A/b
Has there been any disiplined A/B test done to compare the difference between an analog mix vs. a digital mix?
I wonder if software companies like Cakewalk could offer mixing options that improve results if the difference is that dramatic?
For those who prefer analog board mixes, whats appears to be better and by how much?
Bob
Has there been any disiplined A/B test done to compare the difference between an analog mix vs. a digital mix?
I wonder if software companies like Cakewalk could offer mixing options that improve results if the difference is that dramatic?
For those who prefer analog board mixes, whats appears to be better and by how much?
Bob
B
Bob's Mods
New member
Digital Anomaly
One thing I have noticed with digital mixing....mixes created with true left and right tracks sound more pronounced than those created with purely mono ones. For some reason they are beefier (at least on my system). This can be heard and seen in the final mix. I guess both the left and right D/A wants to see its own data stream rather than a mono one that somehow? gets split to feed both D/As.
Its simple to test. Record a simple dity with mono tracks and final mix it. Then clone each mono track to a stereo one and do another mix all things being equal. I hear and see a difference in both mix waveforms. And I don't have to strain to hear it.
No has ever mentioned hearing this effect before so its intensity may vary from configuration to configuration. Is this unique to digital only or is it evident in the now obsolete tape studios as well?
It kinda simulates double tracking now that I think about it.
Bob
One thing I have noticed with digital mixing....mixes created with true left and right tracks sound more pronounced than those created with purely mono ones. For some reason they are beefier (at least on my system). This can be heard and seen in the final mix. I guess both the left and right D/A wants to see its own data stream rather than a mono one that somehow? gets split to feed both D/As.
Its simple to test. Record a simple dity with mono tracks and final mix it. Then clone each mono track to a stereo one and do another mix all things being equal. I hear and see a difference in both mix waveforms. And I don't have to strain to hear it.
No has ever mentioned hearing this effect before so its intensity may vary from configuration to configuration. Is this unique to digital only or is it evident in the now obsolete tape studios as well?
It kinda simulates double tracking now that I think about it.
Bob
Teacher
New member
Bob's Mods said:
Yes its called the AweSUM DAWsum CD. This cd displays one song with all faders and unity no panning, just bounced to 2 track using varioius daws, and mixers digital and analog.
R
rickspringfield
New member
Hey, I've been following this thread, and it's interesting, but I don't know that much about the subject matter. Would anyone feel like stepping back a bit by explaining how exactly you mix in analog when using a DAW- what gear you need, and how it's all set up? I use the MBox with Pro Tools LE and I've never tried this, so I'm interested to learn about it.
G
Garik
Registered Luser
/\ well brotha m box will not help you there 
heres how you mix analog
you rout every track out of your pc into an analog mixer,as you play all your tracks you sum it in the mixer and rout it back to your pc stereo.
so u need at least 16 outs from your PC .....M box only has 2..if i'm not mistaken.
Hope that helps
heres how you mix analog
you rout every track out of your pc into an analog mixer,as you play all your tracks you sum it in the mixer and rout it back to your pc stereo.
so u need at least 16 outs from your PC .....M box only has 2..if i'm not mistaken.
Hope that helps
Track Rat
Just Your Average Sized Member
Before I had my current setup, I was was running a Gina with 8 analog outputs. I'd use them as four analog subgroups. I'd set the console faders to unity and send stuff like the drums to one group, guitars to another, vocals to another, etc.