Pro Tools Summing vs. Chandler TG2 Summing

[Akoppenheffer]

Hey everyone, I'm in the middle of a metal project right now and I'm really enjoying my Chandler TG2. I have double tracked the guitars and I wanted to try out this summing option on the Chandler unit. So both tracks come out of Pro Tools on their own output into the TG2 with the input at +40 for each and the output is at 3 and a half. From there both tracks are coming out channel 2 and hitting an attenuator before back into Pro Tools. These are short .wav files with some "chugs" and open chords. Oh and if you're wondering about converters and what not, it's a Black Lion modded M-Audio Firewire 1814. Which is which?

[space2012]

Originally Posted by Akoppenheffer

Hey everyone, I'm in the middle of a metal project right now and I'm really enjoying my Chandler TG2. I have double tracked the guitars and I wanted to try out this summing option on the Chandler unit. So both tracks come out of Pro Tools on their own output into the TG2 with the input at +40 for each and the output is at 3 and a half. From there both tracks are coming out channel 2 and hitting an attenuator before back into Pro Tools. These are short .wav files with some "chugs" and open chords. Oh and if you're wondering about converters and what not, it's a Black Lion modded M-Audio Firewire 1814. Which is which?

i like A

[Akoppenheffer]

Originally Posted by space2012

i like A

Alright, one for A... Anyone else wanna play? These tracks are completely raw as well. And I know they're not that interesting, just one section I was going over at the time.

[Newcleardaze]

Another vote for A.......seemed to have a bit more heft

[Akoppenheffer]

Also consider what would sit in a mix better. I know it's subtle. But I had to do a lot high pass filtering (not in the sample), as well as adding some bite up top. Thankfully I had some api plugs and the best plug of all, Massey's tape head. That thing does wonders. Since this thread isn't catching on... I'll post some results tomorrow.

[TacosWhenTwisted]

B is better. A is harsher/brittler. B is more rounded wider/fatter.

[Akoppenheffer]

Here we go:

I have to agree with Tacos, I also preferred B. Not because I did the test and know what was what and want to think I spent my money well, but because I honestly think so. I think it cuts a little more and as stated before, sounds fatter.

A is Pro Tools
B is Chandler

Thanks for playing, hopefully next time I'll have a better clip.... I do really love the Chandler piece though.

[papanauta]

allways late

[norman_nomad]

Cool test. I listened and preferred A b/c it was tighter. B had more low spread but I thought it was overwhelming for the clip and took away from the clarity...

Wait... isn't the 'summing' option on the TG2 for summing two mic inputs to one mic output? It's not meant to accept line level ... are you sending a line level signal to the preamp input of the TG2? That would explain the output level at 3 + the attenuator... you're probably over diving the hell out of the input transformer... unless I'm missing something.

[metalfan8806]

A wins to me.

the sample from B sounded more brittle IMO, and A felt more "in my face" as a result.

[lblstudio]

I also chose A.

[ezrecords]

A bit late but B is clearly the chandler. Protools and other daws have great lacks managing the stereo location. In sample B the stereo is more wide open, this is one of the reasons that people usually likes to use external summing

[TranscendingM]

Originally Posted by ezrecords

A bit late but B is clearly the chandler. Protools and other daws have great lacks managing the stereo location. In sample B the stereo is more wide open, this is one of the reasons that people usually likes to use external summing

I wouldn't say that DAW's have an inability to manage stereo location. What we may attribute to sounding more "open" or "wide" in the analog domain is due more to distortions, crosstalk, and so forth. These affect the perception, amongst other things, of the stereo positioning and width.

[DONNX]

A = rocks!!! B rocks!!! with little more low end..

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by norman_nomad

Cool test. I listened and preferred A b/c it was tighter. B had more low spread but I thought it was overwhelming for the clip and took away from the clarity...

Wait... isn't the 'summing' option on the TG2 for summing two mic inputs to one mic output? It's not meant to accept line level ... are you sending a line level signal to the preamp input of the TG2? That would explain the output level at 3 + the attenuator... you're probably over diving the hell out of the input transformer... unless I'm missing something.

Ya I think you're using your unit wrong OP. How you used it is not what the summing function was meant for.

You can probably get away with it via the DI inputs, but the effect of the pres all over again is going to be overwhelming, as it was in this case.

[Akoppenheffer]

Originally Posted by mobius.media

Ya I think you're using your unit wrong OP. How you used it is not what the summing function was meant for.

You can probably get away with it via the DI inputs, but the effect of the pres all over again is going to be overwhelming, as it was in this case.

Well if I use the DI inputs, I'll be bypassing the input transformer. Would it be better just to back off the line level going in? Or should I run DI Boxes? Personally I liked the B, not just because I know it's the unit... I liked the harmonics in the sample. Therefore, that's what I went with for the final. Also, the talk about the stereo imaging... It was a mono clip...

Here's a full mix, different song, but you'll get the idea. I didn't change guitar tones, and I'm on my laptop and this is the only track I got. It's metal, the singer only does inhales. Also just an MP3...

[HobbyCore]

I preferred A, but I have to say that the difference was not worth $2,000, not even close.

If this was my test, I'd be returning the chandler right away.

edit: I didn't noticed the results posted, apparently I liked the PT one. No tg2 for me.

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by Akoppenheffer

Well if I use the DI inputs, I'll be bypassing the input transformer. Would it be better just to back off the line level going in? Or should I run DI Boxes? Personally I liked the B, not just because I know it's the unit... I liked the harmonics in the sample. Therefore, that's what I went with for the final. Also, the talk about the stereo imaging... It was a mono clip...

ell it will definitely get you more harmonics, what you're doing, but you might lose some clarity and punch as a side effect.

The reason is most summing units are made to accept line levels, blend them, and then re-amplify only enough to come back up to line level.

In your case, you'll either be overloading your mic input by feeding it a line level signal it's not built for, or padding down 40dB on the way in and having to go through another 40db of pre-amplification before the summing even starts.

So it might not be an optimal way to use it.

[vdrumer18]

its B all the way. If you listen closely, you'll hear how A sounds a bit choked. not as open and deep. there's a reason the big boys mix on analog consoles.

keep up the good work.

V.

[SoundEng1]

Originally Posted by HobbyCore

I preferred A, but I have to say that the difference was not worth $2,000, not even close

[ajv205]

Originally Posted by HobbyCore

I preferred A, but I have to say that the difference was not worth $2,000, not even close.

[Akoppenheffer]

Originally Posted by HobbyCore

I preferred A, but I have to say that the difference was not worth $2,000, not even close.

If this was my test, I'd be returning the chandler right away.

edit: I didn't noticed the results posted, apparently I liked the PT one. No tg2 for me.

Keep in mind, it was tracked with the TG2... If you're paying 2 grand just to use the summing feature, well then you're wasting your money. Drop another stack and get 16 channels of Neve summing or whatever. The pres really are stunning. I wouldn't knock the unit.

[clj]

Right on, man. I think with the song you really nailed The Black Dahlia Murder sound. I also have a TG-2, but haven't used it yet.
What else were you using to track?

[Everlast]

i think difference is pretty big in favor of Chandler - at least it's how it sounds to me

[clj]

Read the TG-2 manual today......
you can run line level into the normal inputs without a problem..

From the manual:
"The TG2's warm, natural sound can be used to spice up already recorded tracks or even entire mixes. Just run them through the mic inputs on the rear panel, set the input to minimum (+5db), and back off the output slightly to make unity gain."

[LAstudio]

I prefer B. More hefty.