Harrison Mixbus 3 Music Radar Review

Read about it and watch the video here

http://www.musicradar.com...rrison-mixbus-3-629376

bapu
I think they got it just about right.
 
The only thing they could have pushed harder on is THE SOUND.

I agree Baps...I've used a ton of DAW's and NONE of them SOUND
as good as Mixbus right out of the gate.  There is definitely some "Magic"
going on under the hood...

There is definitely "something" with Mixbus.  Many use it
for the "Mastering", but with V3 you can finally do MIDI Instruments
as well.  While not as "robust" as Sonar, you could certainly track, mix
and Master in Mixbus.

bapu

ampfixer
So you guys use Mixbuss after you've done all the tracking in Sonar?

That's my plan from here on out (I had been waiting for V3 which is 64bit, I'm 99.99% free of 32bit VSTs.

ampfixer
If Mixbuss is designed for the mix/master stages only and has a unique sound it might interest me.

It's unique to my ears. YMMV.

It's not just your ears...

Jeff,
 
Ever since the second (they are up to the fourth) interim release it has behaved pretty good for me.
 
UAD and Plugin Alliance plugs were having problems but on the third interim they got that sorted out (for most, there is one guy who says he crashes with UAD on a MAC).
 
I think some multi-out synths are still not working (EZDrummer 2 comes to mind). But I'm not that full tilt interested in the MIDI. I don't really plan to mix/master projects in MB3 using any MIDI at this point.
 
I am running a test project with MIDI using IVORY and about 20 audio tracks and it works as expected.

A little of topic I know, but something I've often wondered. I've heard people say that the reason why analog consoles can improve the stereo image is because of the subtle differences they introduce between right and left channels due to component tolerances. Does that mean its even more important to make sure that mono instruments are tracked in mono, e.g. not using a stereo track for what is essentially a mono synth patch? And what about if you're using a plugin which centers bass frequencies on a stereo track (e.g. TP Basslane). Would the effectiveness of such a plugin be compromised in that the analog tolerances are going to "undo" that centering a little?

sharke
I've heard people say that the reason why analog consoles can improve the stereo image is because of the subtle differences they introduce between right and left channels due to component tolerances.

 
When you think about it no analog console could have a totally perfect matching between left and right output stages and that may be a contributing factor to slightly increased stereo width and depth.  A few years ago I actually totally refurbished an old Harrison console that belonged to an audio school where I worked as Head of Audio.  The same model that mixed Michael Jackson's 'Thriller'.  I can say without a doubt the left and right output stages were not identical in every respect.  Harrison may have something like that actually going on their Mixbus software.
 
But this is not confined to analog though and this is weird.  I have a Yamaha digital mixer and have always felt that the image was wider when I summed buses in the mixer instead of in the box in the DAW. I thought I was imagining this until I read a very interesting article in September SOS.  It is with Dave O'Donnell who engineered the James Taylor album, 'Before This World'  So he is working mainly in the digital domain and he said exactly the same thing in the article.  He mixed it on the Yamaha DM2000 and he also stated that even mixing digitally on the DM2000 sounds better with more depth than all ITB.  So what is going on there?

Thanks for alerting me back to this. Thanks Bapu for your experiences too. I have put the latest build back on and yes it seems to be working nice for me for sure. Good to be back with Mixbus again. I like the GUI of this DAW as well, it is rather cool. I will give it a good workout.
 
The multiband mastering compressor is nice. As is the EQ and the reverb.  The trick is to back off the tape saturation when you are after super clean sounds. The built in EQ on the masterbuss is real nice too for final touches.
 
I have used the Harrison 32C or 3232 console for lots of tracking and mixing in the audio school while employed there. This software feels and sounds like it a lot.
 
 
 

Mixbus 2.5 was based on the Harrison 32C Console...it was right on their page
at the time...

Now, it appears, they've pulled that blurb for V3....so maybe V3 is based on the 950MX...

Does MB3 support VST3s?

I liked MB 2.5 a lot but really never got too deep because of it being 32 bit. Now that it's 64 bit I am re-intrigued. I prefer to use VST3 when possible and a good portion of my installed plugs are VST3. I would prefer not to have to have VST2 and 3 installed just so I can use them in MB.

Thanks Bapu for the suggestion. Looks interesting

FYI--for all you Mac users.  Harrison has issued a new Interim Release for Mac; it is #2279.  This is not for Windows, which still is on #2257.