paul999

Digital summing with more conversion has more punch and is definitely thicker sounding(not at all how most describe it).

I found an old article in Tape Op reviewing my Toft ATB32. I thought maybe I'd learn something about my console by reading it. While it's the largest article I've ever seen in Tape Op (two full pages), the one point that was repeating about 100,000 times was how much less damage it did than his old Soundcraft Ghost. It took a flip of the switch in the brain to look at mixing consoles as devices doing "damage" and that the good ones generally do less, but this was clearly a point of view he was taking with this too-expensive-but-still-not-robo-pro console price point.

I can't say anything about your console, but this article's point of view seems to be in direct opposition to what most of us ITB guys presume about consoles "enhancing" sound.. I guess it's just a grass-is-always-greener thing.

This whole idea of a sound "enhancement" is mostly bullshit anyway. How many times does a process sound better on EVERYTHING? It happens (particularly with non-linear, saturation type things), but if I want to go darker, the brighter process sucks and vice versa. If I want more transients, the limiter thingy sucks. Looking for magic, generic enhancement across the board is an oversimplification in my opinion whether it be summing, a console, analog this, digital that, etc.

I actually find getting super loud mixes easier in the digital world. When you are going loud you don't want all that extra space. If I was just mixing Jazz and classical and ambient world music I'd go fully analog in a heart beat(if I had recall).

Very interesting!

Brandon

I love this paul. I have found the same thing with my limited experience in the analog world. I definitely find that the space you talk about is easier to manipulate in the analog realm.

Something that has really peaked my interest lately, is knowing the sound of analog Vs. digital. Not meaning I attempt to figure out which was mixed ITB and which was mixed OTB, but listening to a recording, and attempting to mimic the sound with the tools I have at hand.

I am starting to look at recording/mixing the same way I look at music. When playing my instrument, I heard a part, I can instantly play it on the keys, only because after years of practice I can hear where and how to recreate the sounds I heard.

After tearing apart a few mixes recently, I have ignored the processes the engineers used to achieve them and just used my own experience and tools to attempt to achieve the sound.

All that being said, I definitely think what you said is true, and depth is more of an analog concept, while punch and loudness is more of a digital concept.

Sorry for the ramble.

Did you start automating eqs yet?? Like rythmically scoop 520 on a ska guitar (or something like that)??

Paul,

When you mix fully with the console, how do you navigate around your DAW efficiently? Do you just keep the tracks in the DAW raw, and bus everything out to the fx and console, and mix it all back down to a master channel in the console?

A shootout of what your're doing with the console interfaced with the DAW vs a fully ITB emulator like Waves or Slate Digital summers would be amazing.

Originally Posted by dudermn

Did you start automating eqs yet?? Like rythmically scoop 520 on a ska guitar (or something like that)??

I love automating eq's. I've been doing that for a very long time. Good tip!

Originally Posted by paintballnsk

Paul,

When you mix fully with the console, how do you navigate around your DAW efficiently? Do you just keep the tracks in the DAW raw, and bus everything out to the fx and console, and mix it all back down to a master channel in the console?

A shootout of what your're doing with the console interfaced with the DAW vs a fully ITB emulator like Waves or Slate Digital summers would be amazing.

I was running tracks with some Daw processing out to my console where all the effects were on my aux's. If f/x needed automating I had to use something in the box. This is not the case anymore.

Daw interfaced with a console Vs ITB emulator would be cool. I think though that the ITB emulator only provides part of the console picture. The eq's really matter as well and aux summing also really matter. The funny thing is that I am still running my F/X through console channels because I like how they eq the f/x. I am not sure how much this summing matters but it has to be part of the equation. Certainly not a must have though.

aux summing also really matter.

With Slate VCC I always toss it on the aux returns as well.

The eq's really matter

That's the biggest of all factors discussed here and the hardest one to get right in the workflow department. I've got a feeling that within the next 5 years there will be a digitally controlled analog EQ circuit. Not sure if it'll be worth the price, but when dreaming this is what I'd want.

Brandon

Originally Posted by brandondrury

I've got a feeling that within the next 5 years there will be a digitally controlled analog EQ circuit.
Brandon

I believe there's some guitar gear and amps out there that do this. Not sure why it hasn't been adopted into the consoles yet.

All analog path, digitital just controls and recalls the knob settings. I believe the G-System was one of the first if I'm not mistaken. And I thought some of the uber expensive ENGLs, and Diezels do the same.

Is that the kind of thing you were talking about? I assumed the big $80,000+consoles with automated sliders did the same thing.

The way I understand it, the Distressor is actually digitally controlled. I'm only repeating rumors here. I don't have a clue what I'm talking about, but it would seem under those conditions, saving the values to presets would be as simple as adding the same preset functionality we see in pretty much all hardware synths, reverb, and guitar multi-fx.

It can't be THAT expensive. Can it?

Is that the kind of thing you were talking about? I assumed the big $80,000+consoles with automated sliders did the same thing.

Not sure. I'd want a bank of 10 hardware EQs or so that when I opened a song would automatically pull up their settings for that song. I know some fancy console automation is only for level. Others may do more. I'm not sure.

Brandon

I got 50 bucks that in 23 months they'll be on the market.

One thing that hasn't been addressed here - different DAWs also have differing sound stages, especially at the summing points (read Master Out). I have seen it addressed many times regarding whether the DAW was 24 bit fixed, 32 bit float, etc., and, in my experience, this also can translate to a large difference in the end result of the mix. Purely the math of combining waveforms has an effect, the sum being different than the whole and why some mixers prefer some DAWs over others. But it certainly is true that a number of the top mixers are now totally ITB.

Point: Let your ears decide the mix, ITB, Hybrid or analog. If it sounds good, it probably is! ...J