Hi there, I may not have been clear I apologise, what I meant was have them on whilst mixing but not enabled, then A/B them from time to time, it was a technique introduced on the last live stream Cakewalk did, and they are right. It just means if you mix without them enabled and then turn them on for an A/B you will notice more so than if you were mixing with them on from the start. And by latency issues I was really meaning when recording. Sorry for the confusion :) Cheers  

jb101

BluffinMad


Cheers for the A/B comparison, great job on the song by the way, sounds great! The effect is subtle I have found when using it myself, so trying to hear the effect on youtube after the video has been compressed makes it even more subtle, but I recommend people use it, like you say mix with them on but turned off because they do effect latency then A/B them every now and then. Again, great job man!  

@ bluffinmad  - Not sure I understand "Mix with them on, but turned off."  Could you explain?
 
I think the idea is that you mix through them rather than put them on after mixing.  I think this is what Craig is suggesting.  Perhaps he could clarify.  Not sure how latency will affect mixing, either. 
 
Please explain.

BluffinMad


Hi there, I may not have been clear I apologise, what I meant was have them on whilst mixing but not enabled, then A/B them from time to time, it was a technique introduced on the last live stream Cakewalk did, and they are right. It just means if you mix without them enabled and then turn them on for an A/B you will notice more so than if you were mixing with them on from the start. And by latency issues I was really meaning when recording. Sorry for the confusion :) Cheers  

jb101

BluffinMad


Cheers for the A/B comparison, great job on the song by the way, sounds great! The effect is subtle I have found when using it myself, so trying to hear the effect on youtube after the video has been compressed makes it even more subtle, but I recommend people use it, like you say mix with them on but turned off because they do effect latency then A/B them every now and then. Again, great job man!  

@ bluffinmad  - Not sure I understand "Mix with them on, but turned off."  Could you explain?

I think the idea is that you mix through them rather than put them on after mixing.  I think this is what Craig is suggesting.  Perhaps he could clarify.  Not sure how latency will affect mixing, either. 

Please explain.

Thanks for replying.
 
I'm pretty sure that's not what they said in the Webinar.  I'll go back and have another look.
 
I think they said to have them turned on from the beginning of the mixing process, and to "Mix through" the console emulators, otherwise it won't work well.  Much like mixing through a large format desk, you will play to it's strengths, as it were.  Eq-ing or processing through one console will be different than another.
 
I'll just watch the webinar now, and get back.

BluffinMad


Hi there, I may not have been clear I apologise, what I meant was have them on whilst mixing but not enabled, then A/B them from time to time, it was a technique introduced on the last live stream Cakewalk did, and they are right. It just means if you mix without them enabled and then turn them on for an A/B you will notice more so than if you were mixing with them on from the start. And by latency issues I was really meaning when recording. Sorry for the confusion :) Cheers  

jb101

BluffinMad


Cheers for the A/B comparison, great job on the song by the way, sounds great! The effect is subtle I have found when using it myself, so trying to hear the effect on youtube after the video has been compressed makes it even more subtle, but I recommend people use it, like you say mix with them on but turned off because they do effect latency then A/B them every now and then. Again, great job man!  

@ bluffinmad  - Not sure I understand "Mix with them on, but turned off."  Could you explain?

I think the idea is that you mix through them rather than put them on after mixing.  I think this is what Craig is suggesting.  Perhaps he could clarify.  Not sure how latency will affect mixing, either. 

Please explain.
 
 
I had a quick look at the Webinar.  Brandon and Seth tell you to mix through the Console Emulation (i.e. Have them turned on).  What they do say is that if you quick group and turn it off and on then you will really notice the difference when you turn it back on.
 
It is, as Crag says in this thread, to mix with the Console Emulator on, not mix and then turn it on.  You need to hear the effect of the Console Emulation to mix to it.  Watch it again.
 
You are the same chap who has authored the new XI Mix Video, aren't you?..

things like this tend to make me wonder.... I'm 59 years old, was engineer in studios thruout the 70's and 80's and a looong time guitar player.

Over Sony MDR7506 cans at a decent volume....   I really can't hear the difference.  Especially picking which might be what and nothing more than a small tweak of a knob on a master buss might do.

oh well...    ;-(

I hear the difference when CE is "turned off"--definite lack of openess.  Old 70s-80s studio ears here too mixmkr, but the effect seems more pronounced through speakers than cans.

BTW, great presentation at Gearfest, Craig.  You and Thomas Dolby presented a different approach to creating music than tape running past a recording head.  Matrix view deserves a revisit here.

My view on the console emulator is very much what the op refers to. Strapping it on as an effect after the fact is not that useful. Mixing into it seems to make mixing easier. My jury is still out as to whether I'm imagining that, but I'm leaning towards thinking I'm not. 

My view on mike's ABX testing is that he's a guy on the Internet who has heard of ABX testing and assumes everyone else hasn't, and thus thinks he's found an opportunity to be a smartass. He doesn't give the impression of actually being someone who has ever done any ABX testing. I guess being A Big Cheese On The Sonar Forum is as far as some people's ambitions go. 

It must be a very subtle effect because I could not hear the difference. I played the video 10 times through   
and could not detect it. I don't even know what to look for. This must be one of those 64 bit is better than 32 bit kind of things.... I can not detect the difference in that either.

I know it does not mean that there is no difference and I am not saying that at all. My ears are not bad I just can't hear it. 

Craig thanks for posting and starting the thread and the tip about grouping all the console emulators is a good one. Now I have more questions then answers and I think it is time for me to run my own test concerning The Console Emulation. I just have been preoccupied with TH2.

To those who claim to hear massive differences between the two I say you are imagining it. If Craig had put up that same video clip with NO indications where the IN and OUT emulations were taking place you would not have picked it all I am sure.

Maybe the fact the audio is going up onto YouTube etc is degrading things to the point where this sort of AB test is meaningless. A better solution would be to upload two 16 Bit 44.1K files up onto Soundcloud say and label them A and B. Make them downloadable so we can download them and then we do the listening tests with much better sounding files. See if we can pick the difference that way.

Who says console emulation is superior to non console emulation anyway. It is only opinion not fact. One could argue that a digital signal going between point A and B will still sound better than going through an analog console first. Remember analog consoles are not all that great and can be accused of degrading the signal.

Back to the old principal of if you start with a great composition and you have captured a great performance is console emulation going to make it SO much better. I say it will have no bearing on how the listener has been moved (or not moved) by the music. Focus on the music not the tools. The tools are insignificant.

I am also sure that Craig is hearing differences at his end. I think there has been something lost in the translation from his studio to the Youtube video that is all.

Jeff I read your first line and LOL because I see it the same you do. Now I did not subject the vid to careful analysis but I couldn't tell any difference. 

  Also it was playing through my computer speakers. They are not average but quite good for what they are. None the less, I did not run it through my monitors. So I figured that it was due to the setup and the fact that it was streaming audio going through a Realtec audio chip. 

I am not saying it didn't do anything just I couldn't hear a difference.