Karyn
Ma-Ma
- Total Posts : 9200
- Joined: 2009/01/30 08:03:10
- Location: Lincoln, England.
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 12:20:03
(permalink)
I'm not attacking anyone. There are numerous posts all over the internet stating that Elvis is still alive and the Americans went to the moon. They're not all correct.
There are numerous reasons why a final render may appear to sound different to a mix down pass, the best I can think of is relaxing back in your chair to admire your work, thus changing your listening possition from hunched over your keyboard, staring at your monitor.
That doesn't alter the fact you're you're hearing the same data stream and thus it will be identical, even if it doesn't seem so.
Mekashi Futo. Get 10% off all Waves plugins.Current DAW. i7-950, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, 12Gb RAM, 1Tb SSD, 2x2Tb HDD, nVidia GTX 260, Antec 1000W psu, Win7 64bit, Studio 192, Digimax FS, KRK RP8G2, Sonar Platinum
|
DonaldDuck
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 789
- Joined: 2007/03/14 16:46:29
- Location: Tha South baby!
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 12:27:50
(permalink)
Karyn
I'm not attacking anyone. There are numerous posts all over the internet stating that Elvis is still alive and the Americans went to the moon. They're not all correct.
There are numerous reasons why a final render may appear to sound different to a mix down pass, the best I can think of is relaxing back in your chair to admire your work, thus changing your listening possition from hunched over your keyboard, staring at your monitor.
That doesn't alter the fact you're you're hearing the same data stream and thus it will be identical, even if it doesn't seem so.
The Elvis comment has to be the most absurd statement ever "rendered" on a forum. Perhaps the "same stream" thing may apply if you specify disabling "fast bounce" as it takes me 4 minutes to listen to a 4 minute song not the approximately 1.5 minutes it takes Sonar to render it...
post edited by DonaldDuck - 2010/10/06 15:38:27
|
Karyn
Ma-Ma
- Total Posts : 9200
- Joined: 2009/01/30 08:03:10
- Location: Lincoln, England.
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 12:36:00
(permalink)
DonaldDuck
Perhaps the "same stream" thing may apply if you specify disabling "fast bounce" as it takes me 4 minutes to listen to a 4 minute song not the approximately 1.5 minutes it takes Sonar to render it...
I totally get your point, but... Real time : 1 2 3 4 5 Fast bounce : 12345 Playback fast bounce : 1 2 3 4 5 I downloaded last nights Eastenders from iPlayer earlier, it took about 10 mins for the whole 30 min episode, but I'm sure the ending is still the same (and just as bad)
Mekashi Futo. Get 10% off all Waves plugins.Current DAW. i7-950, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, 12Gb RAM, 1Tb SSD, 2x2Tb HDD, nVidia GTX 260, Antec 1000W psu, Win7 64bit, Studio 192, Digimax FS, KRK RP8G2, Sonar Platinum
|
AT
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10654
- Joined: 2004/01/09 10:42:46
- Location: TeXaS
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 13:25:55
(permalink)
There will be differences, even using the 64 bit engine, if you bounce a mix down from 24 bit to 16. Maybe. Definately going to mp3. That I can hear. Math is math, hearing is hearing and subjective.
To skip any possiblity of the above happening, I used to bounce (ITB) to 24 bits and now record the mix after going analog to 24 bit and keep that"mix" with the project. It should be "what I hear" or as close as possible. I can then master, top and tail etc. w/ that file, again hoping to maximize the sound quality. The last step is to dither to 16 bits for CD. And I find I'm more often making changes to the mix and or master from listening on different systems (Car, living room, etc) than any small difference in methodologies on my main studio speakers. ITB, Analogue etc. may be the gravy dancing on the head of a pin, but it ain't the meat. And to tell the truth, I'm not sure that my investment in some good analog has more to do w/ "the better sound I hear" these days or just practice, practice practice or justifying my investment.
@
https://soundcloud.com/a-pleasure-dome
http://www.bnoir-film.com/ there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. 24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
|
DonaldDuck
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 789
- Joined: 2007/03/14 16:46:29
- Location: Tha South baby!
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 15:27:01
(permalink)
AT
There will be differences, even using the 64 bit engine, if you bounce a mix down from 24 bit to 16. Maybe. Definately going to mp3. That I can hear. Math is math, hearing is hearing and subjective.
To skip any possiblity of the above happening, I used to bounce (ITB) to 24 bits and now record the mix after going analog to 24 bit and keep that"mix" with the project. It should be "what I hear" or as close as possible. I can then master, top and tail etc. w/ that file, again hoping to maximize the sound quality. The last step is to dither to 16 bits for CD. And I find I'm more often making changes to the mix and or master from listening on different systems (Car, living room, etc) than any small difference in methodologies on my main studio speakers. ITB, Analogue etc. may be the gravy dancing on the head of a pin, but it ain't the meat. And to tell the truth, I'm not sure that my investment in some good analog has more to do w/ "the better sound I hear" these days or just practice, practice practice or justifying my investment.
@
Yes, the mixing process has lot to do with the sound. Mixing in a professional environment is a very complex thing with many variables. It's hard to make absolute statements, which is the mere essence of my initial post on this thread. Many people love making absolutes with things that are inherently subjective anyway. I hear many mixes on the radio that would never leave my studio in that condition, even with a cheap demo that I record. If people know what they are doing, it's possible to have amazing sounding mixes ITB. However, it's also possible to have terrible mixes. Both aforementioned cases assume the song isn't crap to start with. The same holds true for out of the box mixes, including out of the box digital mixes, which seem to be gaining popularity with people around here. Whatever floats peoples boat I guess... I'm not arrogant enough to bash ITB mixers or their techniques while thinking I'm superior. I just know the way *I* like mixes to sound and the process that leads me to that result. My clients love the mixes that I do for them for the most part. I have people who fly to Nashville to record in very expensive studios and bring back the tracks for me to mix. I do it my way. If they want it done differently, they can go else where. There are plenty of ITB mixers if that's their flavor of mixing. However, the majority, by far, prefers my mixes... AT, what is that piece of gear you have in your display pic? It looks fancy... and I"m a sucker for nice gear.. 
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 16:07:27
(permalink)
DonaldDuck
If people know what they are doing, it's possible to have amazing sounding mixes ITB. However, it's also possible to have terrible mixes.
And of course it's possible to have terrible mixes (or even worse than terrible) mixes outside the box too. 
|
AT
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10654
- Joined: 2004/01/09 10:42:46
- Location: TeXaS
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 16:26:26
(permalink)
DonaldDuck and Drew,
I've done bad mixes w/ good equipment, and good ones w/o. A lot has to do w/ arrangement anyway, which comes before the recording process.
Donald,
that is the new Rupert Neve Designs Portico II channel strip. Not a very good picture. I've got it in for review, and decided to keep it. The wifey (who sings for me and others) said she could hear the difference, so it got to stay. #83 made. :-)
@
https://soundcloud.com/a-pleasure-dome
http://www.bnoir-film.com/ there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. 24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
|
Jose7822
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10031
- Joined: 2005/11/07 18:59:54
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 18:48:06
(permalink)
AT
The wifey (who sings for me and others) said she could hear the difference, so it got to stay. #83 made. :-)
All wifes should be that way :-)
Intel Q9400 2.66 GHz 8 GB of RAM @ 800 Mhz ATI Radeon HD 3650 Windows 7 Professional (SP1) x64 Cubase 6.03 x64 Sonar PE 8.5.3 x64 RME FireFace 400 Frontier Design Alpha Track Studio Logic VMK-188 Plus http://www.youtube.com/user/SonarHD
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 22:42:31
(permalink)
AT
DonaldDuck and Drew,
I've done bad mixes w/ good equipment, and good ones w/o. A lot has to do w/ arrangement anyway, which comes before the recording process.
@
Words of wisdom. I think arrangement is too often the most overlooked part of the process. We spend hours writing and hours mixing, but, IMHO, in most cases, the bulk of the work has to be done before you start to mix. George Martin is credited as a producer, but to me, first and foremost, he was an arranger - he didn't just mix, he put the songs in their actual shape. He found THE angle for all of those songs. Then they mixed an put it out... A great song usually requires less arrangement, meaning that it requires less mixing and that in the end, mastering requires even less tweaking. Each of those steps require careful attention, of course, but if the guy before you did his homework, every step should be like fine-tuning and enhancing, not making it work....
post edited by Rain - 2010/10/06 22:43:41
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
DonaldDuck
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 789
- Joined: 2007/03/14 16:46:29
- Location: Tha South baby!
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 22:59:43
(permalink)
AT
Donald,
that is the new Rupert Neve Designs Portico II channel strip. Not a very good picture. I've got it in for review, and decided to keep it. The wifey (who sings for me and others) said she could hear the difference, so it got to stay. #83 made. :-)
@
Nice... Channel strips are nice, but I got a few pieces of hardware I like to use, so I mix and match different compressors and preamps. It's hard to beat the sound from the UA610 into a UA LA-3A. It's something special for me. The Portico being from Rupert Neve, I'm guessing it isn't cheap. My poor Visa and Discover card get a workout when I start drooling over gear. 
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/06 23:39:16
(permalink)
What I don't get is the the Slate quote was about the best desks one can buy. Legendary comes to mine. These are hand made custom desks made with the very best components available. That quote said they are full of distortion. Here we are talking about project studio gear at best. Yet for some reason people think that they will sound as good as desks costing 10 times the amount and people expect the same level of quality as if they spent $100,000 on their mixer. I can see a plugin in a digital system to add the qualities that some want from those great desks but when they make Mackie mixer channels for DAWs then I will agree that a cheap mixer or cheap analog gear is on par with a Nerve desk. Simply liking any analog gear because its analog troubles me. Besides affordable analog gear is analog in name only. Most is digital internally if its affordable. I think its very disingenuous to use a high quality console as the reason for going analog when none of those here have such a console. Even then spec wise a cheap digital unit will run rings around any pure analog gear.
post edited by John - 2010/10/06 23:52:40
|
AT
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10654
- Joined: 2004/01/09 10:42:46
- Location: TeXaS
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/07 00:09:11
(permalink)
Yea, Donald, the Portico costs. But John points to the real problem with cheaper gear - when pushed it does add distortion, and not the kind that "enhances" the sound in anyone's ear. As he sez, it is rather silly to think you will get an expensive sound out of cut rate gear. Most of it works really well as long as you aren't hitting the extemes where the flaws tend to show up.
Take preamps. Most interface cards max out at 60 dB of gain or so. And if you crank them up to 11 bad things start to happen, not the least of which is finding the small spot that delivers just enough sound. Most "pro" gear gets you closer to 80 dB or more, leaving more play within the pots. And if you do crank them up they still have some headroom so if someone sneezes you don't get nasty overdriven stuff as easily. The extra gain and headroom help as much as color a lot of the time.
@
https://soundcloud.com/a-pleasure-dome
http://www.bnoir-film.com/ there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. 24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
|
DonaldDuck
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 789
- Joined: 2007/03/14 16:46:29
- Location: Tha South baby!
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/07 02:08:15
(permalink)
AT
Yea, Donald, the Portico costs. But John points to the real problem with cheaper gear - when pushed it does add distortion, and not the kind that "enhances" the sound in anyone's ear. As he sez, it is rather silly to think you will get an expensive sound out of cut rate gear. Most of it works really well as long as you aren't hitting the extemes where the flaws tend to show up.
Take preamps. Most interface cards max out at 60 dB of gain or so. And if you crank them up to 11 bad things start to happen, not the least of which is finding the small spot that delivers just enough sound. Most "pro" gear gets you closer to 80 dB or more, leaving more play within the pots. And if you do crank them up they still have some headroom so if someone sneezes you don't get nasty overdriven stuff as easily. The extra gain and headroom help as much as color a lot of the time.
@
Yup, thats the reason I buy the best! 
|
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3617
- Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/07 04:17:58
(permalink)
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
|
rednex
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2
- Joined: 2010/10/07 07:23:35
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/07 07:45:37
(permalink)
I found this vintage summing mixer gear, the price is damm too good for this unit.(32 ch for half price!) I'm a simple user who has to try the analog summing, not expert, engineer big guy..:) I saw another stuffs, like SM Pro Audio PM8 Summing Mixer(only 8 inputs), RMS216 FOLCROM(16 input passive-need gain make up) or TL Audio summing 16 input .(more expensive and wery few channel number)) e.g Neve 8816 have 16 mono inputs...equal with 8 stereo ch-s? All I need from a summing unit is a simple design with a clean and discrete amp, I really don't want to see any pot, useless routings and catchy elements. So I think this vintage summing with 32input worth the price...and is totally controllable from DAW, absolute repeatability..etc.. Vintage Lawo jensenmann on gearslutz says: "These things are by far the cleanest opamps I have ever heard and used." web: http://vintagemaker.net/
post edited by rednex - 2013/01/17 06:25:26
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2010/10/07 11:21:49
(permalink)
John
What I don't get is the the Slate quote was about the best desks one can buy. Legendary comes to mine. These are hand made custom desks made with the very best components available. That quote said they are full of distortion. Here we are talking about project studio gear at best. Yet for some reason people think that they will sound as good as desks costing 10 times the amount and people expect the same level of quality as if they spent $100,000 on their mixer. I can see a plugin in a digital system to add the qualities that some want from those great desks but when they make Mackie mixer channels for DAWs then I will agree that a cheap mixer or cheap analog gear is on par with a Nerve desk. Simply liking any analog gear because its analog troubles me. Besides affordable analog gear is analog in name only. Most is digital internally if its affordable.
I think its very disingenuous to use a high quality console as the reason for going analog when none of those here have such a console. Even then spec wise a cheap digital unit will run rings around any pure analog gear.
While I almost agree 100% (floating point digital summing will have far less - and possibly none at all - noise/distortion/crosstalk/etc., even at 32bits, than even the best analog gear), to be fair, I should point out that some issues (like noise and headroom) are severe problems on a large console with, say, 96 channels driven simultaneously. For a summing box with only 8-16 (mono) channels, these issues, with reasonable design and components, aren't as big of a deal. Large consoles have to be pristine in part because they have so many channels. If I recall correctly, the main reason Neve changed the (simple) summing design between the vintage consoles and later ones, was because the increase in channel counts made the original method too noisy. Having said that, I agree that since the whole reason for using a summing box is get "pleasing" distortion (or other artifacts), then it doesn't make sense to use gear that might hurt more than it helps what you're trying to achieve.
|
slimakaphatj
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6
- Joined: 2011/04/05 01:33:49
- Location: Wellingotn, NZ
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2011/06/30 07:03:00
(permalink)
I haven't posted much in here, but this is my two cents from doing a couple of half arsed tests.
I used to think that this was just a ploy to get people to spend money on fancey gear that they didn't need but thought if its just resistors and a bit of soldering, why not just make a simple cheap as chips one and just see if it sounds any better or not. Obvioulsy the exspensive ones have a gain stage and bells and whistles, but who needs that in a bedroom studio like I have.
There are a few forums and sites with design ideas etc. I went super cheap and got a aluminium 2U rack cover and put 16 TRS in and two (L and R) out, 8-1 Left and 8-1 Right. I just used stiff copper wire out of some spare RG59 cable I had lying around and soldered it all up. Used 10K resitors on pins 2 and 3 and a shunt of about 220Ohms (I think that makes the output low Z for mic pre). Check out some sites if you'l see how basic they really can be. I think this all worked out to give an approximatley correct impedance match for most general line outs (works alright anyway).
You then just feed that back into a mic Pre and off you go (no phantom power though, dont fry anything). Built the whole thing in like 3 hours or something. If I keep using it I will probably need to shield it or somethind as it all open and near a computer (doesn't seem overly noisy though).
Have done a few mix tests, so far I've only sent out 4 sub busses out of Sonar and brought it back into a spare track to record. I didn't notice any difference when listening on my monitors (which are more like 747s than fighter jets). But on head phones I swear to god the left and right sit slightly wider and the mono stuff (mostly vocals that I've noticed) sits either more central or seems that way because the guitars sound wider.
Its very (very) subtle and like I said, on monitors I couldn't hear it. Plus If you are more of at skilled mixer perhaps you can pick those sorts of things and deal with that in the box. But to me it does seem like it helps if only a small amount.
I would also point out Im running Presonus firestudio Projects so It's not like I'm runing out of the lastest and greatest digital beast from SSL or whatever, I would imagine that the best converters money can buy would perhaps make things more even. One of these days I'll get the full 8 busses out of a big mix and see how it compares on a grander scale.
i5, TI Firewire Card, 4gig Ram, Sonar 8, Presonus Fire Studio Projects x2, Presonus HP60 Headphone amp. Behringer XU Control 25 Key Midi controller. Laney GH100L, Digitech RP1000, Celestion V30s. An assortment of ****ty mics plus a couple of OK ones.
|
slimakaphatj
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6
- Joined: 2011/04/05 01:33:49
- Location: Wellingotn, NZ
- Status: offline
Re:Does an analog summing mixer really make mixes sound better?
2011/07/02 04:09:07
(permalink)
Just realised that last paragraph doesn't make any sense as you wouldn't be running out of an ITB mix, ha ha.
i5, TI Firewire Card, 4gig Ram, Sonar 8, Presonus Fire Studio Projects x2, Presonus HP60 Headphone amp. Behringer XU Control 25 Key Midi controller. Laney GH100L, Digitech RP1000, Celestion V30s. An assortment of ****ty mics plus a couple of OK ones.
|