Why a mixer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter f. lai
  • Start date Start date
Thank you for posting that, Ethan ( and mea culpa for spelling your name wrong in my previous post:( )

Normally I wouldnt care about Teacher's post, but a lot of people (like me) have forums like this as their sole source of learning, and any dis-information that doesnt make sense just confuses everyone who is searching for the correct info.
 
Bang on right David.

I have been into this for about 18 months and it has been a hard slog to learn what little I know now. And if I had seen posts like that when I was starting out, I would have have been scared to make the investment in time and money.

I spent some time recently in a pro-recording studio with some old-hand engineers with top rated resumes that we would die for.

And the top man there told me that he used outboard gear cos he loved to twiddle knobs and some of the gear does provide excellent sounds. But....he then went on to say that from what he listens to now, a lot of the gear could be made redundant because of the "quality of sounds" from the plug-ins he has witnessed.

And I know that to be so, just checkout the free demo Reverb from timeworks, it is stunning, as good as any of my guitar fx that I have or have used in years of playing.

And how mant times do we see newbies on this site saying, "I don't know anything about recording, please tell me what I should do/buy/use etc." At least twice a week?

I saw a post in another forum recently from AlChuck replying to some piece of similar disinformation i.e. a man told a friend who told his sister who told his dog who .......you get the picture.

Anyway, AlChucks message was "don't just accept what people tell you, do your own research." And he is right.

End of sermon. I apologise:)
 
Im still laughing at the statement that says.. When you go from Radar 24 to a HD recorder and then to Pro tools, and back to Radar, the sound is degraded....

This doesn't make any sense... not to mention the fact that Radar IS a HD recorder......

He He
 
David,

> a lot of people (like me) have forums like this as their sole source of learning, and any dis-information that doesnt make sense just confuses everyone <

Yes, there is a lot of misinformation out there. In my Audio Myths article I make the point that recording engineering is not like real engineering, where you actually have to know the theory behind what you are doing. :)

If you, or others here, haven't seen that, it's near the top of the list on my Articles web page:

www.ethanwiner.com/articles.html

--Ethan
 
like i said guy i had NO personal experience go to that website and go take it wit them so they can tell u and explain it....i think the dude sells Pro tools rigs in a matter of fact....and yes i have the sonic timeworks, tc ,waves, and they will do the job for demo work it still not ready for the big time

i'm waitin to get PSP Vintage Warmer that suppose to be Great and its cheap to
Bomb factory plugs suppose to be tight to but they expensive as what too

but u definitly need some nice analog outboard gear to juice up the sound

its cheaper then getting those 20gee SSL consoles
 
Holy Moly

Ethan, Holy S$%t!!

Man, I didnt know that was you who wrote the Cello Concerto!! I read that article in Strings, and other stuff, but that was before I started Computer recording. I of course know of your articles about recording, but I had no idea you are also the composer. I am a hardcore Pro violinist by the way. I will listen to the Cello Concerto this afternoon. Great to have you around here! Dave
 
Quote Teacher "I have no personal experience but someone at the website at the mentioned above did a test transfering files from Radar 24..a digital HD recorder(i think...i know its digital) to pro tools and said they heard a significant degradation in the sound when transferred back to radar... "

I'm by no means an expert at anything we talk about in any of these forums.......However, I believe (and I could be wrong) that the above statement as VOX has said "doesn't make any sense."
If there is a "Degradation" of sound quality when going to digital to digital then there is a problem with the digital gear and how it is set up...............The fundamental theory behind digital music in itself, as I said before, is that sound is reduced to numbers.......and the conclusion you then make after knowing that, is that numbers do not degrade......... it is the numbers that = equal the sound in the case of digital music and the numbers do not degrade......(that's why they call it digital....ie digits = numbers)

That's just my take, I'm sure a pro would probably tell me I'm wrong.........BTW....Where's Blue Bear?


-nave
 
And now for the good news...

As computers keep getting faster and faster the all digital recording studio will keep getting closer and closer to the sonic nirvana of analog!
 
nave said:
The fundamental theory behind digital music in itself, as I said before, is that sound is reduced to numbers.......and the conclusion you then make after knowing that, is that numbers do not degrade......... it is the numbers that = equal the sound in the case of digital music and the numbers do not degrade......(that's why they call it digital....ie digits = numbers)

-nave
Click to expand...

Very good point, and thats the basis of the CDR Theory.... A no name brand CDR sounds Identical to a Top of the line brand like Quantegy or Apogey...

Yeah the strength of the material might be crappier in the cheap cdr, and not the best material for the laser to read from...therefore making it not playable in ALL players, But sound wise, they all sound the same.. they have to.. It's a mathematical certainty...

Correct me if im wrong though......

And digital recording from digital to digital gear should be the same theory.....
 
Here's what I can offer...

Mix everything in SONAR.

Try this: insert any piece of signal processing gear you can buy at Guitar Center into your recording chain and set it to bypass mode. Any piece of gear at all: compressor, effects processor, aurul enhancer, whatever. Put in bypass mode and record through it. Then take it clear out of the loop and record a signal straight into the sound card. You will hear a difference.

Why?

Because most consumer-grade audio gear sucks. Don't get me wrong, it all has a place in the great continuum of audio production, and there are many, many useful pieces of gear out there in the consumer price range. But by and large it will all degrade your signal to some extent.

Any recordist using low to mid level gear is FAR better off getting all thier signals into their computer as directly as possible, and then leaving them there. Every additional piece of cheap junk you run it through will diminish its integrity. That's why so many people even bypass the EQ section on their Mackie mixers: to prevent the signal from passing through yet one more group of cheap components.

On a true pro level, this may not be the case. On a TRUE pro level. But you can't buy TRUE pro audio gear at Guitar Center.

Aaron
http://www.aaroncheney.com
 
-----------------------On a true pro level, this may not be the case. On a TRUE pro level. But you can't buy TRUE pro audio gear at Guitar Center.-----------------------------

You trying to tell me they've been ripping me off this whole time :D

=nave
 
T,

> go to that website and go take it wit them so they can tell u and explain it. <

I don't need anyone to explain "it" to me. I've been doing this stuff for going on 40 years, so perhaps I should explain it to them.

> i have the sonic timeworks, tc ,waves, and they will do the job for demo work it still not ready for the big time <

It is true that reverb plug-ins in particular are often not as good as real hardware (ie: plate) or dedicated outboard DSP boxes. Understand that outboard digital reverbs are exactly the same as a plug-in, except the plug-in designers need to minimize the intensity of the reverb computations so the host computer has time to do the other stuff a DAW needs. But the difference is not simply because one reverb is in a box that says Dell or Gateway on the outside and the other is in a box that says EMT or Lexicon.

--Ethan
 
Re: Holy Moly

Dave,

> Man, I didn't know that was you who wrote the Cello Concerto!! <

Yes that's me, for better or worse. :)

> I am a hardcore Pro violinist by the way. <

I just went to your site. Wow, those are some great credentials! If only you lived near me. I could use your playing on some of my projects!

--Ethan
 
Re: Here's what I can offer...

Aaron,

> most consumer-grade audio gear sucks.

This is less true these days than years ago. In the old days (20+ years ago) recording engineers would have been thrilled to have gear with the low noise and distortion of even the most modestly priced gear sold today.

> That's why so many people even bypass the EQ section on their Mackie mixers ... On a true pro level, this may not be the case. <

Good advice. But even with the most expensive gear, it's always best for the audio to go through as few stages as possible.

--Ethan
 
Re: Re: Here's what I can offer...

Ethan Winer said:
Aaron,

> most consumer-grade audio gear sucks.

This is less true these days than years ago. In the old days (20+ years ago) recording engineers would have been thrilled to have gear with the low noise and distortion of even the most modestly priced gear sold today.
Click to expand...

Agreed. In terms of todays gear, though, I think the point is valid.

You are absolutely right that we are getting more for our bucks today than ever before. Things have certainly changed. I can remember one time we spent hours splicing two-track tape with a razor and a cutting block, trying to shorten the bridge of a song we had already recorded to get the length of the track down under 4 minutes (long story). Those were the days!

I see debates about this all the time regarding microphones. I'm interested to hear your opinion. So many pro recordists still maintain a somewhat elitist attitude regarding mic's and mic pre's. With the advent of the C1 and others, I think the gap is at least narrowed, if not bridged.

Just a few years ago, some accounting software companies sold their software for thousands of dollars. Then along came Intuit and others, selling equally good software for a couple hundred bucks. The big-boys have now dropped their prices down to just a couple hundred bucks as well. If they can suddenly afford to sell if for a couple hundred, then what was the deal a year ago? Were they gouging because there was no alternative?

I really think we are at the same place w/ mic's. Now, I know it's an imperfect analogy, but you see my point.

What do you think?

Aaron
http://www.aaroncheney.com
 
Modern bargains

Aaron,

> I see debates about this all the time regarding microphones. I'm interested to hear your opinion. <

The most boring reviews in magazines are of microphones. Part of the problem is that so few magazines are honest, or maybe they really don't know any better. Every microphone review - no matter what is said in the body of the review - concludes with "So if you're looking for a really good mike for the money, this one is surely worth considering." But I digress...

I haven't tried many of the current budget microphones. I bought an audiotechnica 4033 a year after they came out, when they cost $650, and I like it so much I bought a second one last year (for $350 - 'course now they're down to $299). It's been too many years since I owned a real U87 to remember the sound exactly, but the 4033 is every bit as usable. In fact, I like my 4033 more than the Neumann TLM 103 a friend bought recently.

> Then along came Intuit and others, selling equally good software for a couple hundred bucks. ... Were they gouging because there was no alternative? <

Yes, exactly. Most products are overpriced, and the best place to see the proof is at the supermarket. You can buy a box of baking soda for 50 cents (store brand), which sets the standard for how cheaply a product can be manufactured and delivered to the store while still making a profit. Now look at almost anything else on the store shelves:

My wife uses BufPuf, which is basically four cents worth of plastic ScotchBrite but it costs $4.00. (I refuse to pay that so I get the store brand for "only" $3.00). Then look at hand lotions for $10 per container. Or bottled water that can cost as much as $2 for a quart. The grand prize goes to lottery tickets which cost $1 and up but are totally devoid of any actual value. :)

--Ethan
 
yall almost got me convinced that all those guys over there are biased towards digital but the fact is

99% of albums are mixed then mastered going thru some sort of outboard gear...if computer mixing was comparable y would they do that? and it still boggles my mind why the recording pros at prosoundweb would LIE considering they haven't invested there money in any of the equipment they just go to the studio and do there thing...

whats also important guys

Eyes before EARS except after SEE
relying to much on our eyes instead ears this ain't TV program its MUSIC
 
> 99% of albums are mixed then mastered going thru some sort of outboard gear <

So? A lot of folks have yet to move from outboard gear to doing everything in the computer. The number of "pros" who do it one way versus the other has no bearing on whether computers are as good as outboard gear. And you can be sure that more and more CDs are spending more and more time inside a computer.

> it still boggles my mind why the recording pros at prosoundweb would LIE considering ... <

Hey, I see YOU posting there, and you're obviously not a pro. So everyone else who posts there is not necessarily a pro. :) More to the point, many people have opinions which are not necessarily based on fact. I doubt anyone is outright lying, but just because someone believes an outboard EQ is better than a plug-in doesn't make it so.

--Ethan
 
Teacher wrote:

all those guys over there are biased towards digital
Click to expand...


But I thought we were having an arguement about inboard vs outboard though, not digital vs analogue.. And according to your post, they are "biased towards digital" :D
 
Getting back to the original question. You don't need a mixer unless your computer/sound card/software cannot do something the mixer can. Some DAWs (Digital Audio Workstation) can, some can't. Do your research.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top